Message208512
inspect.signature(object) works fine in my (not yet posted) latest #20189 patch.
inspect.signature(type) doesn't work, because it's not clear what the signature for type should be. There's the one-argument and three-argument approaches. This is technically true:
"(object_or_name, [bases, dict])"
However,
a) it's painful to look at,
b) I can't communicate the idea of an "optional group" in an inspect.Signature object right now (although I guess we're going to hash that out somewhere, which is good).
If we can agree on a good signature for inspect.signature(type), I can make it happen. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2014-01-19 23:36:58 | larry | set | recipients:
+ larry, brett.cannon, ncoghlan, yselivanov |
2014-01-19 23:36:58 | larry | set | messageid: <1390174618.67.0.286966058482.issue20308@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2014-01-19 23:36:58 | larry | link | issue20308 messages |
2014-01-19 23:36:58 | larry | create | |
|