On Jul 7, 10:44 pm, Michele Simionato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 7, 8:08 pm, "Adam C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks. I think we would want new-style classes, and 6-year-old
> > patches strike me as maybe a little out of the desired path... so this
> > really just doesn't work in
On Jul 7, 4:04 pm, Carl Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 9:31 am, "Adam C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > We have a situation where we want a Swig-generated Python class to
> > have a different base (not object). It doesn't appear that we can
> > coerce Swig into generating the c
On Jul 7, 8:08 pm, "Adam C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks. I think we would want new-style classes, and 6-year-old
> patches strike me as maybe a little out of the desired path... so this
> really just doesn't work in modern Python?
Can you use (multiple) inheritance instead of changing the
On Jul 7, 9:31 am, "Adam C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have a situation where we want a Swig-generated Python class to
> have a different base (not object). It doesn't appear that we can
> coerce Swig into generating the class we want at present (but we are
> still enquiring).
>
> Is it possi
On Jul 7, 9:11 am, George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 9:31 am, "Adam C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > We have a situation where we want a Swig-generated Python class to
> > have a different base (not object). It doesn't appear that we can
> > coerce Swig into generating th
On Jul 7, 9:31 am, "Adam C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have a situation where we want a Swig-generated Python class to
> have a different base (not object). It doesn't appear that we can
> coerce Swig into generating the class we want at present (but we are
> still enquiring).
>
> Is it possi
