Metaclasses vs. standard Python reflection?

[Michele Simionato]

rcs at russellsalsbury.com (Russ Salsbury) wrote in message news:<3ea624c6.0305021314.40a3d8c6 at posting.google.com>...
<snip a very interesting discussion on AOP>
> The interesting thing about metaclasses (and python in general) is it
> gives us a simple way to tackle some very hairy problems.  Contrast
> that with AOP where many reachers at a number of universities have
> spent nearly a decade to come up with a very elegant solution to a
> subset of the same problems.  (Acutually there are a number of big
> academic solutions to the same set of problems.)
> 
> I expect that as pythonistas start using metaclasses some very elegant
> methods for specifying metaclasses will emerge.  Then someone will
> invent AspectP.  Solve the problem, then make the solution elegant. 
> Very Pythonish.
> 
> My candidate for needs-an-elegant-solution is how to specify metaclass
> composition.
> 
> Take a look at "Putting Metaclasses to Work" by Forman and Danforth
> for ideas on the use of metaclasses, although you will have to slog
> through C++ and an excessive need to be mathematically formal.
> 
> -- Russ

Thank you for the very interesting post. I know the metaclass book;
actually I started taking metaclasses seriously after reading it. Before, 
their relevance was very unclear to me and actually I was quite skeptical ;)


                                  Michele