Should I write a book on Python Metaprogramming ?

[Bjorn Pettersen]

> From: David Mertz [mailto:mertz at gnosis.cx] 
> 
> Hi gang,
> 
> Regular readers know who I am... so I won't bother with any more than
> the overblown bio in the proposal text itself.
> 
> Here's the story though:  For a number of months, I have had 
> in mind the idea of writing a book called _Metaprogramming 
> in Python_.

[...]

> So here's my questions to c.l.py.  Would you want a book 
> along the below lines at all?  Do you only want it if it 
> focusses closely on Python?  Or would you rather have a 
> book that addressed several languages fairly equally, 
> with Python just one among them?

Well, I would definitely buy it. (and perhaps a book would make Guido
give us better syntax <wink>). My only concern is that the Python
definition of metaclasses is very new, and pretty unique in it's
details, so I'm not sure "we" know enough about how they mix-and-match
both with other metaclasses and with the rest of the system to write a
book yet, however, that might also be a very good reason _to_ write a
book (at least you'll be frequently cited :-). If you think you do know,
go write it now! <smile>

Metaclasses are very unique in their implmeentation, so I would keep the
focus on Python. A reference to Smalltalk would be appropriate, and also
the LISP macro system (for solving the general problem, probably giving
an explanation for why this special case is more important).

-- bjorn