AppPkg/Applications/Python: Add Python 2.7.2 sources since the release of Python 2.7.3 made them unavailable from the python.org web site.
These files are a subset of the python-2.7.2.tgz distribution from python.org. Changed files from PyMod-2.7.2 have been copied into the corresponding directories of this tree, replacing the original files in the distribution. Signed-off-by: daryl.mcdaniel@intel.com git-svn-id: https://edk2.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/edk2/trunk/edk2@13197 6f19259b-4bc3-4df7-8a09-765794883524
This commit is contained in:
darylm503
@@ -0,0 +1,605 @@
|
||||
<HTML>
|
||||
|
||||
<HEAD>
|
||||
<TITLE>Metaclasses in Python 1.5</TITLE>
|
||||
</HEAD>
|
||||
|
||||
<BODY BGCOLOR="FFFFFF">
|
||||
|
||||
<H1>Metaclasses in Python 1.5</H1>
|
||||
<H2>(A.k.a. The Killer Joke :-)</H2>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
(<i>Postscript:</i> reading this essay is probably not the best way to
|
||||
understand the metaclass hook described here. See a <A
|
||||
HREF="meta-vladimir.txt">message posted by Vladimir Marangozov</A>
|
||||
which may give a gentler introduction to the matter. You may also
|
||||
want to search Deja News for messages with "metaclass" in the subject
|
||||
posted to comp.lang.python in July and August 1998.)
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>In previous Python releases (and still in 1.5), there is something
|
||||
called the ``Don Beaudry hook'', after its inventor and champion.
|
||||
This allows C extensions to provide alternate class behavior, thereby
|
||||
allowing the Python class syntax to be used to define other class-like
|
||||
entities. Don Beaudry has used this in his infamous <A
|
||||
HREF="http://maigret.cog.brown.edu/pyutil/">MESS</A> package; Jim
|
||||
Fulton has used it in his <A
|
||||
HREF="http://www.digicool.com/releases/ExtensionClass/">Extension
|
||||
Classes</A> package. (It has also been referred to as the ``Don
|
||||
Beaudry <i>hack</i>,'' but that's a misnomer. There's nothing hackish
|
||||
about it -- in fact, it is rather elegant and deep, even though
|
||||
there's something dark to it.)
|
||||
|
||||
<P>(On first reading, you may want to skip directly to the examples in
|
||||
the section "Writing Metaclasses in Python" below, unless you want
|
||||
your head to explode.)
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Documentation of the Don Beaudry hook has purposefully been kept
|
||||
minimal, since it is a feature of incredible power, and is easily
|
||||
abused. Basically, it checks whether the <b>type of the base
|
||||
class</b> is callable, and if so, it is called to create the new
|
||||
class.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Note the two indirection levels. Take a simple example:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
class B:
|
||||
pass
|
||||
|
||||
class C(B):
|
||||
pass
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
Take a look at the second class definition, and try to fathom ``the
|
||||
type of the base class is callable.''
|
||||
|
||||
<P>(Types are not classes, by the way. See questions 4.2, 4.19 and in
|
||||
particular 6.22 in the <A
|
||||
HREF="http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw.py" >Python FAQ</A>
|
||||
for more on this topic.)
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The <b>base class</b> is B; this one's easy.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Since B is a class, its type is ``class''; so the <b>type of the
|
||||
base class</b> is the type ``class''. This is also known as
|
||||
types.ClassType, assuming the standard module <code>types</code> has
|
||||
been imported.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Now is the type ``class'' <b>callable</b>? No, because types (in
|
||||
core Python) are never callable. Classes are callable (calling a
|
||||
class creates a new instance) but types aren't.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
</UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>So our conclusion is that in our example, the type of the base
|
||||
class (of C) is not callable. So the Don Beaudry hook does not apply,
|
||||
and the default class creation mechanism is used (which is also used
|
||||
when there is no base class). In fact, the Don Beaudry hook never
|
||||
applies when using only core Python, since the type of a core object
|
||||
is never callable.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>So what do Don and Jim do in order to use Don's hook? Write an
|
||||
extension that defines at least two new Python object types. The
|
||||
first would be the type for ``class-like'' objects usable as a base
|
||||
class, to trigger Don's hook. This type must be made callable.
|
||||
That's why we need a second type. Whether an object is callable
|
||||
depends on its type. So whether a type object is callable depends on
|
||||
<i>its</i> type, which is a <i>meta-type</i>. (In core Python there
|
||||
is only one meta-type, the type ``type'' (types.TypeType), which is
|
||||
the type of all type objects, even itself.) A new meta-type must
|
||||
be defined that makes the type of the class-like objects callable.
|
||||
(Normally, a third type would also be needed, the new ``instance''
|
||||
type, but this is not an absolute requirement -- the new class type
|
||||
could return an object of some existing type when invoked to create an
|
||||
instance.)
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Still confused? Here's a simple device due to Don himself to
|
||||
explain metaclasses. Take a simple class definition; assume B is a
|
||||
special class that triggers Don's hook:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
class C(B):
|
||||
a = 1
|
||||
b = 2
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
This can be though of as equivalent to:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
C = type(B)('C', (B,), {'a': 1, 'b': 2})
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
If that's too dense for you, here's the same thing written out using
|
||||
temporary variables:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
creator = type(B) # The type of the base class
|
||||
name = 'C' # The name of the new class
|
||||
bases = (B,) # A tuple containing the base class(es)
|
||||
namespace = {'a': 1, 'b': 2} # The namespace of the class statement
|
||||
C = creator(name, bases, namespace)
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
This is analogous to what happens without the Don Beaudry hook, except
|
||||
that in that case the creator function is set to the default class
|
||||
creator.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>In either case, the creator is called with three arguments. The
|
||||
first one, <i>name</i>, is the name of the new class (as given at the
|
||||
top of the class statement). The <i>bases</i> argument is a tuple of
|
||||
base classes (a singleton tuple if there's only one base class, like
|
||||
the example). Finally, <i>namespace</i> is a dictionary containing
|
||||
the local variables collected during execution of the class statement.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Note that the contents of the namespace dictionary is simply
|
||||
whatever names were defined in the class statement. A little-known
|
||||
fact is that when Python executes a class statement, it enters a new
|
||||
local namespace, and all assignments and function definitions take
|
||||
place in this namespace. Thus, after executing the following class
|
||||
statement:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
class C:
|
||||
a = 1
|
||||
def f(s): pass
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
the class namespace's contents would be {'a': 1, 'f': <function f
|
||||
...>}.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>But enough already about writing Python metaclasses in C; read the
|
||||
documentation of <A
|
||||
HREF="http://maigret.cog.brown.edu/pyutil/">MESS</A> or <A
|
||||
HREF="http://www.digicool.com/papers/ExtensionClass.html" >Extension
|
||||
Classes</A> for more information.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
<H2>Writing Metaclasses in Python</H2>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>In Python 1.5, the requirement to write a C extension in order to
|
||||
write metaclasses has been dropped (though you can still do
|
||||
it, of course). In addition to the check ``is the type of the base
|
||||
class callable,'' there's a check ``does the base class have a
|
||||
__class__ attribute.'' If so, it is assumed that the __class__
|
||||
attribute refers to a class.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Let's repeat our simple example from above:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
class C(B):
|
||||
a = 1
|
||||
b = 2
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
Assuming B has a __class__ attribute, this translates into:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
C = B.__class__('C', (B,), {'a': 1, 'b': 2})
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
This is exactly the same as before except that instead of type(B),
|
||||
B.__class__ is invoked. If you have read <A HREF=
|
||||
"http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw.py?req=show&file=faq06.022.htp"
|
||||
>FAQ question 6.22</A> you will understand that while there is a big
|
||||
technical difference between type(B) and B.__class__, they play the
|
||||
same role at different abstraction levels. And perhaps at some point
|
||||
in the future they will really be the same thing (at which point you
|
||||
would be able to derive subclasses from built-in types).
|
||||
|
||||
<P>At this point it may be worth mentioning that C.__class__ is the
|
||||
same object as B.__class__, i.e., C's metaclass is the same as B's
|
||||
metaclass. In other words, subclassing an existing class creates a
|
||||
new (meta)inststance of the base class's metaclass.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Going back to the example, the class B.__class__ is instantiated,
|
||||
passing its constructor the same three arguments that are passed to
|
||||
the default class constructor or to an extension's metaclass:
|
||||
<i>name</i>, <i>bases</i>, and <i>namespace</i>.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>It is easy to be confused by what exactly happens when using a
|
||||
metaclass, because we lose the absolute distinction between classes
|
||||
and instances: a class is an instance of a metaclass (a
|
||||
``metainstance''), but technically (i.e. in the eyes of the python
|
||||
runtime system), the metaclass is just a class, and the metainstance
|
||||
is just an instance. At the end of the class statement, the metaclass
|
||||
whose metainstance is used as a base class is instantiated, yielding a
|
||||
second metainstance (of the same metaclass). This metainstance is
|
||||
then used as a (normal, non-meta) class; instantiation of the class
|
||||
means calling the metainstance, and this will return a real instance.
|
||||
And what class is that an instance of? Conceptually, it is of course
|
||||
an instance of our metainstance; but in most cases the Python runtime
|
||||
system will see it as an instance of a a helper class used by the
|
||||
metaclass to implement its (non-meta) instances...
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Hopefully an example will make things clearer. Let's presume we
|
||||
have a metaclass MetaClass1. It's helper class (for non-meta
|
||||
instances) is callled HelperClass1. We now (manually) instantiate
|
||||
MetaClass1 once to get an empty special base class:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
BaseClass1 = MetaClass1("BaseClass1", (), {})
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
We can now use BaseClass1 as a base class in a class statement:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
class MySpecialClass(BaseClass1):
|
||||
i = 1
|
||||
def f(s): pass
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
At this point, MySpecialClass is defined; it is a metainstance of
|
||||
MetaClass1 just like BaseClass1, and in fact the expression
|
||||
``BaseClass1.__class__ == MySpecialClass.__class__ == MetaClass1''
|
||||
yields true.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>We are now ready to create instances of MySpecialClass. Let's
|
||||
assume that no constructor arguments are required:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
x = MySpecialClass()
|
||||
y = MySpecialClass()
|
||||
print x.__class__, y.__class__
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
The print statement shows that x and y are instances of HelperClass1.
|
||||
How did this happen? MySpecialClass is an instance of MetaClass1
|
||||
(``meta'' is irrelevant here); when an instance is called, its
|
||||
__call__ method is invoked, and presumably the __call__ method defined
|
||||
by MetaClass1 returns an instance of HelperClass1.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Now let's see how we could use metaclasses -- what can we do
|
||||
with metaclasses that we can't easily do without them? Here's one
|
||||
idea: a metaclass could automatically insert trace calls for all
|
||||
method calls. Let's first develop a simplified example, without
|
||||
support for inheritance or other ``advanced'' Python features (we'll
|
||||
add those later).
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
import types
|
||||
|
||||
class Tracing:
|
||||
def __init__(self, name, bases, namespace):
|
||||
"""Create a new class."""
|
||||
self.__name__ = name
|
||||
self.__bases__ = bases
|
||||
self.__namespace__ = namespace
|
||||
def __call__(self):
|
||||
"""Create a new instance."""
|
||||
return Instance(self)
|
||||
|
||||
class Instance:
|
||||
def __init__(self, klass):
|
||||
self.__klass__ = klass
|
||||
def __getattr__(self, name):
|
||||
try:
|
||||
value = self.__klass__.__namespace__[name]
|
||||
except KeyError:
|
||||
raise AttributeError, name
|
||||
if type(value) is not types.FunctionType:
|
||||
return value
|
||||
return BoundMethod(value, self)
|
||||
|
||||
class BoundMethod:
|
||||
def __init__(self, function, instance):
|
||||
self.function = function
|
||||
self.instance = instance
|
||||
def __call__(self, *args):
|
||||
print "calling", self.function, "for", self.instance, "with", args
|
||||
return apply(self.function, (self.instance,) + args)
|
||||
|
||||
Trace = Tracing('Trace', (), {})
|
||||
|
||||
class MyTracedClass(Trace):
|
||||
def method1(self, a):
|
||||
self.a = a
|
||||
def method2(self):
|
||||
return self.a
|
||||
|
||||
aninstance = MyTracedClass()
|
||||
|
||||
aninstance.method1(10)
|
||||
|
||||
print "the answer is %d" % aninstance.method2()
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
Confused already? The intention is to read this from top down. The
|
||||
Tracing class is the metaclass we're defining. Its structure is
|
||||
really simple.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The __init__ method is invoked when a new Tracing instance is
|
||||
created, e.g. the definition of class MyTracedClass later in the
|
||||
example. It simply saves the class name, base classes and namespace
|
||||
as instance variables.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The __call__ method is invoked when a Tracing instance is called,
|
||||
e.g. the creation of aninstance later in the example. It returns an
|
||||
instance of the class Instance, which is defined next.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
</UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>The class Instance is the class used for all instances of classes
|
||||
built using the Tracing metaclass, e.g. aninstance. It has two
|
||||
methods:
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The __init__ method is invoked from the Tracing.__call__ method
|
||||
above to initialize a new instance. It saves the class reference as
|
||||
an instance variable. It uses a funny name because the user's
|
||||
instance variables (e.g. self.a later in the example) live in the same
|
||||
namespace.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The __getattr__ method is invoked whenever the user code
|
||||
references an attribute of the instance that is not an instance
|
||||
variable (nor a class variable; but except for __init__ and
|
||||
__getattr__ there are no class variables). It will be called, for
|
||||
example, when aninstance.method1 is referenced in the example, with
|
||||
self set to aninstance and name set to the string "method1".<P>
|
||||
|
||||
</UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>The __getattr__ method looks the name up in the __namespace__
|
||||
dictionary. If it isn't found, it raises an AttributeError exception.
|
||||
(In a more realistic example, it would first have to look through the
|
||||
base classes as well.) If it is found, there are two possibilities:
|
||||
it's either a function or it isn't. If it's not a function, it is
|
||||
assumed to be a class variable, and its value is returned. If it's a
|
||||
function, we have to ``wrap'' it in instance of yet another helper
|
||||
class, BoundMethod.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>The BoundMethod class is needed to implement a familiar feature:
|
||||
when a method is defined, it has an initial argument, self, which is
|
||||
automatically bound to the relevant instance when it is called. For
|
||||
example, aninstance.method1(10) is equivalent to method1(aninstance,
|
||||
10). In the example if this call, first a temporary BoundMethod
|
||||
instance is created with the following constructor call: temp =
|
||||
BoundMethod(method1, aninstance); then this instance is called as
|
||||
temp(10). After the call, the temporary instance is discarded.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The __init__ method is invoked for the constructor call
|
||||
BoundMethod(method1, aninstance). It simply saves away its
|
||||
arguments.<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>The __call__ method is invoked when the bound method instance is
|
||||
called, as in temp(10). It needs to call method1(aninstance, 10).
|
||||
However, even though self.function is now method1 and self.instance is
|
||||
aninstance, it can't call self.function(self.instance, args) directly,
|
||||
because it should work regardless of the number of arguments passed.
|
||||
(For simplicity, support for keyword arguments has been omitted.)<P>
|
||||
|
||||
</UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>In order to be able to support arbitrary argument lists, the
|
||||
__call__ method first constructs a new argument tuple. Conveniently,
|
||||
because of the notation *args in __call__'s own argument list, the
|
||||
arguments to __call__ (except for self) are placed in the tuple args.
|
||||
To construct the desired argument list, we concatenate a singleton
|
||||
tuple containing the instance with the args tuple: (self.instance,) +
|
||||
args. (Note the trailing comma used to construct the singleton
|
||||
tuple.) In our example, the resulting argument tuple is (aninstance,
|
||||
10).
|
||||
|
||||
<P>The intrinsic function apply() takes a function and an argument
|
||||
tuple and calls the function for it. In our example, we are calling
|
||||
apply(method1, (aninstance, 10)) which is equivalent to calling
|
||||
method(aninstance, 10).
|
||||
|
||||
<P>From here on, things should come together quite easily. The output
|
||||
of the example code is something like this:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
calling <function method1 at ae8d8> for <Instance instance at 95ab0> with (10,)
|
||||
calling <function method2 at ae900> for <Instance instance at 95ab0> with ()
|
||||
the answer is 10
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>That was about the shortest meaningful example that I could come up
|
||||
with. A real tracing metaclass (for example, <A
|
||||
HREF="#Trace">Trace.py</A> discussed below) needs to be more
|
||||
complicated in two dimensions.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>First, it needs to support more advanced Python features such as
|
||||
class variables, inheritance, __init__ methods, and keyword arguments.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Second, it needs to provide a more flexible way to handle the
|
||||
actual tracing information; perhaps it should be possible to write
|
||||
your own tracing function that gets called, perhaps it should be
|
||||
possible to enable and disable tracing on a per-class or per-instance
|
||||
basis, and perhaps a filter so that only interesting calls are traced;
|
||||
it should also be able to trace the return value of the call (or the
|
||||
exception it raised if an error occurs). Even the Trace.py example
|
||||
doesn't support all these features yet.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
<H1>Real-life Examples</H1>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Have a look at some very preliminary examples that I coded up to
|
||||
teach myself how to write metaclasses:
|
||||
|
||||
<DL>
|
||||
|
||||
<DT><A HREF="Enum.py">Enum.py</A>
|
||||
|
||||
<DD>This (ab)uses the class syntax as an elegant way to define
|
||||
enumerated types. The resulting classes are never instantiated --
|
||||
rather, their class attributes are the enumerated values. For
|
||||
example:
|
||||
|
||||
<PRE>
|
||||
class Color(Enum):
|
||||
red = 1
|
||||
green = 2
|
||||
blue = 3
|
||||
print Color.red
|
||||
</PRE>
|
||||
|
||||
will print the string ``Color.red'', while ``Color.red==1'' is true,
|
||||
and ``Color.red + 1'' raise a TypeError exception.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<DT><A NAME=Trace></A><A HREF="Trace.py">Trace.py</A>
|
||||
|
||||
<DD>The resulting classes work much like standard
|
||||
classes, but by setting a special class or instance attribute
|
||||
__trace_output__ to point to a file, all calls to the class's methods
|
||||
are traced. It was a bit of a struggle to get this right. This
|
||||
should probably redone using the generic metaclass below.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<DT><A HREF="Meta.py">Meta.py</A>
|
||||
|
||||
<DD>A generic metaclass. This is an attempt at finding out how much
|
||||
standard class behavior can be mimicked by a metaclass. The
|
||||
preliminary answer appears to be that everything's fine as long as the
|
||||
class (or its clients) don't look at the instance's __class__
|
||||
attribute, nor at the class's __dict__ attribute. The use of
|
||||
__getattr__ internally makes the classic implementation of __getattr__
|
||||
hooks tough; we provide a similar hook _getattr_ instead.
|
||||
(__setattr__ and __delattr__ are not affected.)
|
||||
(XXX Hm. Could detect presence of __getattr__ and rename it.)
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<DT><A HREF="Eiffel.py">Eiffel.py</A>
|
||||
|
||||
<DD>Uses the above generic metaclass to implement Eiffel style
|
||||
pre-conditions and post-conditions.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<DT><A HREF="Synch.py">Synch.py</A>
|
||||
|
||||
<DD>Uses the above generic metaclass to implement synchronized
|
||||
methods.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<DT><A HREF="Simple.py">Simple.py</A>
|
||||
|
||||
<DD>The example module used above.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
</DL>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>A pattern seems to be emerging: almost all these uses of
|
||||
metaclasses (except for Enum, which is probably more cute than useful)
|
||||
mostly work by placing wrappers around method calls. An obvious
|
||||
problem with that is that it's not easy to combine the features of
|
||||
different metaclasses, while this would actually be quite useful: for
|
||||
example, I wouldn't mind getting a trace from the test run of the
|
||||
Synch module, and it would be interesting to add preconditions to it
|
||||
as well. This needs more research. Perhaps a metaclass could be
|
||||
provided that allows stackable wrappers...
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
<H2>Things You Could Do With Metaclasses</H2>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>There are lots of things you could do with metaclasses. Most of
|
||||
these can also be done with creative use of __getattr__, but
|
||||
metaclasses make it easier to modify the attribute lookup behavior of
|
||||
classes. Here's a partial list.
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Enforce different inheritance semantics, e.g. automatically call
|
||||
base class methods when a derived class overrides<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Implement class methods (e.g. if the first argument is not named
|
||||
'self')<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Implement that each instance is initialized with <b>copies</b> of
|
||||
all class variables<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Implement a different way to store instance variables (e.g. in a
|
||||
list kept outside the instance but indexed by the instance's id())<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Automatically wrap or trap all or certain methods
|
||||
|
||||
<UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>for tracing
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>for precondition and postcondition checking
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>for synchronized methods
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>for automatic value caching
|
||||
|
||||
</UL>
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>When an attribute is a parameterless function, call it on
|
||||
reference (to mimic it being an instance variable); same on assignment<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Instrumentation: see how many times various attributes are used<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Different semantics for __setattr__ and __getattr__ (e.g. disable
|
||||
them when they are being used recursively)<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Abuse class syntax for other things<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Experiment with automatic type checking<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Delegation (or acquisition)<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Dynamic inheritance patterns<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<LI>Automatic caching of methods<P>
|
||||
|
||||
</UL>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
<H4>Credits</H4>
|
||||
|
||||
<P>Many thanks to David Ascher and Donald Beaudry for their comments
|
||||
on earlier draft of this paper. Also thanks to Matt Conway and Tommy
|
||||
Burnette for putting a seed for the idea of metaclasses in my
|
||||
mind, nearly three years ago, even though at the time my response was
|
||||
``you can do that with __getattr__ hooks...'' :-)
|
||||
|
||||
<P>
|
||||
|
||||
<HR>
|
||||
|
||||
</BODY>
|
||||
|
||||
</HTML>
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user