Author larry
Recipients brett.cannon, larry, ncoghlan, yselivanov
Date 2014-01-19.23:36:58
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1390174618.67.0.286966058482.issue20308@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
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.
History
Date User Action Args
2014-01-19 23:36:58larrysetrecipients: + larry, brett.cannon, ncoghlan, yselivanov
2014-01-19 23:36:58larrysetmessageid: <1390174618.67.0.286966058482.issue20308@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2014-01-19 23:36:58larrylinkissue20308 messages
2014-01-19 23:36:58larrycreate