Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k?

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu Nov 22 12:27:03 CET 2007 
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Given that the error is of limited value and that otherwise the
> unbound method behaves exactly the same as the original function
> object, I'd like to see if there are strenuous objections against
> dropping unbound method objects altogether (or at least not using them
> in this case), so that explicit super calls (via the unbound method)
> may go a little faster. Also, it would make it easier to fix this
> issue: http://bugs.python.org/issue1109

Assuming the proposal is simply to change function.__get__ to return 
self when the second argument is None, then +1.

The method descriptors for types written in C should continue to return 
a wrapper which performs the typecheck, as C method implementations tend 
to assume that the self argument is guaranteed to be of the correct 
type. Having to perform that check manually would be rather tedious.

This does introduce a new discrepancy between types implemented in C and 
Python classes, but I suspect that the underlying difference in memory 
layout restrictions is always going to leak through in at least a few 
places.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
             http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list