Author gvanrossum
Recipients BNMetrics, gvanrossum, josh.r, pablogsal, pekka.klarck, xtreak
Date 2018-11-07.21:25:23
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1541625923.92.0.788709270274.issue34805@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Thanks for the long post! Clearly there is more here than the eye can easily see.

Nevertheless, I feel that, *in this case*, it's not likely that such a re-implementation will ever happen, so I think it is okay to constrain the future so we can guarantee (the ordering aspect of) the current behavior. The current behavior also *feels* natural, regardless of the validity of the OP's use case.

The edge case of assignment to __bases__ is a good one to call out (in the docs and in the test) but I don't think the current behavior there is sufficiently dicey to change it or to exclude it from the guarantee.
History
Date User Action Args
2018-11-07 21:25:23gvanrossumsetrecipients: + gvanrossum, pekka.klarck, josh.r, pablogsal, xtreak, BNMetrics
2018-11-07 21:25:23gvanrossumsetmessageid: <1541625923.92.0.788709270274.issue34805@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2018-11-07 21:25:23gvanrossumlinkissue34805 messages
2018-11-07 21:25:23gvanrossumcreate