Author ncoghlan
Recipients ethan.furman, ncoghlan
Date 2013-05-12.12:52:34
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1368363154.63.0.116278955804.issue17954@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Simply removing the restriction isn't actually appropriate, as the variants that allow addition of new members should *not* allow addition of new descriptors.

That's why I'm wondering if the current subclassing restriction is wrong: if you subclass an Enum derivative that already has defined members, then adding new members is OK, but adding new behaviour is not. If you subclass an Enum derivative with no members, then adding either members or behaviours is fine.

If we relaxed the "no subclassing" rule to "no new non-members", then this Enums would be natively extensible and this customisation hack wouldn't be necessary at all.

We have plenty of time before 3.4 - let's get the existing implementation in before worrying further about this.
History
Date User Action Args
2013-05-12 12:52:34ncoghlansetrecipients: + ncoghlan, ethan.furman
2013-05-12 12:52:34ncoghlansetmessageid: <1368363154.63.0.116278955804.issue17954@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-05-12 12:52:34ncoghlanlinkissue17954 messages
2013-05-12 12:52:34ncoghlancreate