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.

Author ryan.freckleton
Recipients BreamoreBoy, doerwalter, gvanrossum, kteague, ncoghlan, paul.moore, pitrou, ryan.freckleton
Date 2010-07-22.19:18:15
SpamBayes Score 1.0542e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
An elaborate PEP for generic functions already exists, PEP 3124 []. Also note the reasons for
deferment. I'd be interested in creating a "more limited" generic function
implementation based on this PEP, minus func_code rewriting and the other
fancier items. Sadly I won't have any bandwidth to work on it until January
of next year.

I'd vote for keeping this issue open because of that.

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Antoine Pitrou <>wrote:

> Antoine Pitrou <> added the comment:
> Generic functions are a lesser-known paradigm than OO, and nowhere do
> common Python documents (including the official docs) try to teach them.
> That means the first public appearance of generic functions in the stdlib
> should really be well thought out if we don't want to encourage poor
> practices. I agree with Guido that a PEP is required to flesh out all the
> details.
> ----------
> nosy: +pitrou
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <>
> <>
> _______________________________________
File name Uploaded
unnamed ryan.freckleton, 2010-07-22.19:18:14
Date User Action Args
2010-07-22 19:18:19ryan.freckletonsetrecipients: + ryan.freckleton, gvanrossum, doerwalter, paul.moore, ncoghlan, pitrou, kteague, BreamoreBoy
2010-07-22 19:18:15ryan.freckletonlinkissue5135 messages
2010-07-22 19:18:15ryan.freckletoncreate