Re: meteclasses 2.x/3.x compatibility

References	<mailman.600.1303264623.9059.python-list@python.org> <fd66cfd9-0af3-4e04-a320-2c587414d31a@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
From	James Mills <prologic@shortcircuit.net.au>
Date	2011-04-21 08:36 +1000
Subject	Re: meteclasses 2.x/3.x compatibility
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.674.1303339014.9059.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:18 PM, andrew cooke <andrew@acooke.org> wrote:
> What I do in Lepl is use two stages.  The first calls the type/metaclass directly and the second subclasses that.  This avoids using the "sugar" that changes between 2 and 3.
>
> So, for example, in http://code.google.com/p/lepl/source/browse/src/lepl/matchers/matcher.py#40 I have
>
>  _Matcher = ABCMeta('_Matcher', (object, ), {})
>
> and then
>
>  class Matcher(_Matcher):
>      ...

Thank Andrew. I like this approach Elegance wins for me :)

cheers
James

-- 
-- James Mills
--
-- "Problems are solved by method"

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: meteclasses 2.x/3.x compatibility andrew cooke <andrew@acooke.org> - 2011-04-20 05:18 -0700
  Re: meteclasses 2.x/3.x compatibility James Mills <prologic@shortcircuit.net.au> - 2011-04-21 08:36 +1000

csiph-web