An alternative approach to bound methods

[Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk]

Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:02:45 +0000 (GMT), Tim Couper <drtimcouper at yahoo.co.uk> pisze:

> Being a simple soul, I wonder if it might be possible to restate
> the proposal again, maybe in a top-down manner.

I will write it precisely at some time.

> Would I be right in saying that an objective (or is it
> a consequence?) of the proposal is to permit Pythonesque
> class methods as well as class attributes in Python?

I would say that having class methods is a consequence. Class
attributes are already present - currently they can have any type
except the function type, i.e. except what would make them act as
class methods.

> If so, does the "this-is-what-I-would-like" example which I gave
> in a previous email demonstrate the requirement correctly?

I'm not sure if I understands its intent, but yes, it will work
(with static(args), not static(self,args)).

-- 
 __("<  Marcin Kowalczyk * qrczak at knm.org.pl http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
 \__/
  ^^                      SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA
QRCZAK