Message210103
> Not for builtin functions, but it's unclear to me why the API of
> builtin functions should be different from that of Python functions
> (except, as I said, for the existence of byte code).
I really don't follow you. You seem to be saying that __text_signature__ is a bad idea, and keep talking about existing
APIs that provide for the same functionality, but you decline to name
specifics.
Be specific. Let's say we remove __text_signature__. How do we
now write a C extension in a way that we can have introspection
information for its callables?
If __text_signature__ is redundant with existing APIs, then we should remove it now before 3.4 ships. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2014-02-03 09:49:58 | larry | set | recipients:
+ larry, terry.reedy, ncoghlan, pitrou, scoder, benjamin.peterson, eric.araujo, python-dev, yselivanov |
2014-02-03 09:49:58 | larry | set | messageid: <1391420998.31.0.445893789144.issue17159@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2014-02-03 09:49:58 | larry | link | issue17159 messages |
2014-02-03 09:49:58 | larry | create | |
|