Ok no worries then! Thanks for the tips. I might wait until tomorrow then until someone comes along who deals with metaclasses and alternate class constructors.
In case you're curious, I'm doing two things that are relevant here, and I'll link the python3 cookbook examples that are super useful (I love that book): http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1230000000393/ch09. html#_discussion_155 and http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1230000000393/ch08.html#_solution_134 They explain things very well. Metaclasses are so useful when you hit a use case that they fit into. I don't often deal with multiple class constructors, so I'm a bit new to that territory and I'm trying to delve into the details of how python classes are constructed (namely, whether `type.__call__` does more than just call `cls.__new__` and `self.__init__`). Thanks for the help too. On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Stefan Ram <r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes: > >|PyObject *meth = lookup_method(self, &PyId___call__); > ... > >|Call self as a function. > > Oh, I guess this might be what makes > > int(x) > > call > > int.__call__(x) > > . And all other instances of this metaclass. > > Let's try to overwrite it to call 'charles' instead. > > main.py > > class mymetaclass( type ): > def __call__( this, *args ): > this.charles( *args ) > > class myclass( metaclass=mymetaclass ): > def charles(): > print( "Charles" ) > > myclass() > > transcript > > Charles > > Ok, while I managed to make »myclass« print »Charles« > using a »__call__« function of it's metaclass, I still > don't know what I am doing. This is the first time I > actually deal with the topic of metaclasses. I have not > yet read a text book chapter about them, so I'm still > in the dark like the Chinese in the Chinese room. > > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
