Kristján Valur Jónsson added the comment:
Thanks Guido.
The current patch provides the property you ask for. I will see if I can make
the "fiddling" of the internal tuple less magical.
I have one other question for you: The standard "mro" puts the class in the
0th position.
But apparently, there is a mechanism for a "custom" mro, by calling an mro()
function on the type (as far as I understand).
However, the order of objects in the returned tuple is not verified, only the
types of the objects therein (this is in mro_internal())
Yet there is code that manually skips the 0th element, e.g. this code
/* Initialize tp_dict properly */
bases = type->tp_mro;
assert(bases != NULL);
assert(PyTuple_Check(bases));
n = PyTuple_GET_SIZE(bases);
for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
PyObject *b = PyTuple_GET_ITEM(bases, i);
if (PyType_Check(b))
inherit_slots(type, (PyTypeObject *)b);
}
(from PyType_Ready())
I'm not familiar with the mro() function. What kind of black magic is it
supposed to provide? And how can we make sure that its free-form return value
is reconciled with the 1-based loop above?
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue17950>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
