Hacker News Reader

Comment by hosay123 | Hacker News Reader

Once again, this sounds like a bug report, not a ranty blog post

And what exactly should the bug report be? "I do not agree with design decision made 25 years ago, please make backwards incompatible change?".

The first might be "Let's replace all use of tp_* with hash lookups", which I suppose would be closed quickly, amidst a storm of muffled giggles. But at least by then you'd know why the current implementation works the way it does.

The next might be "__getattribute__ mechanism has surprising behaviour in common use-case" (which itself would imply having a use case where any of this mattered). This one might actually result in some productive discussion regarding a fix.

Your second reply is basically a doc bug, one of "__getattribute__ optimization is not specified in the language reference" or "__getattribute__ optimization causes non-comformance with the language specification", either way, you would get the attention of the few people who can actually help you, rather than attention from the many more who can't

You're assuming I am not aware why the system works the way it does currently which is incorrect. I outlined what a Python could look like, not what I want the CPython guys to implement. I am perfectly aware that this is not going to happen.

I think if you had titled the post differently you would have ended up with a lot less argumentation about how what you propose isn't a good idea for python.

As it is, the title at least primes the reader to think you are asking for what you go on to describe.

Ok, what is the bug report? Can you post the bug report as you'd write from your perspective.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com