➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2011-11-14 17:33 by rhettinger, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| add_method_signature_to_xmlrpc_server.patch | vajrasky, 2013-09-23 07:37 | review | ||
| Messages (3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg147623 - (view) | Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) *  |
Date: 2011-11-14 17:33 | |
Currently, the server has a stub method that returns: 'signatures not supported'. Using the inspect module, it shouldn't be difficult to provide function/method signatures for over-the-wire introspection. |
|||
| msg147641 - (view) | Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2011-11-14 23:30 | |
How do you infer the data types for the parameters? |
|||
| msg198315 - (view) | Author: Vajrasky Kok (vajrasky) * | Date: 2013-09-23 07:37 | |
> How do you infer the data types for the parameters? I don't think we can, unless we force them to use function annotation. If they don't use that feature, then we say the signature is not supported. The problem is getting deeper if we are talking about return value type. if a == 1: return 'spam' else: return 3.14 I therefore embrace the dynamic nature of Python with this patch. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:57:23 | admin | set | github: 57613 |
| 2013-09-23 07:37:05 | vajrasky | set | files:
+ add_method_signature_to_xmlrpc_server.patch nosy: + vajrasky messages: + msg198315 keywords: + patch |
| 2013-07-12 07:43:39 | rhettinger | set | versions: + Python 3.4, - Python 3.3 |
| 2011-11-18 17:21:07 | eric.araujo | set | nosy:
+ eric.araujo |
| 2011-11-14 23:30:28 | loewis | set | messages: + msg147641 |
| 2011-11-14 23:00:21 | pitrou | set | nosy:
+ loewis, flox |
| 2011-11-14 17:33:42 | rhettinger | create | |