From: itsme213 <itsme213@...>
Date: 2004-12-01T09:07:46+09:00
Subject: Re: [OFF] Python 2.4 released

> and there's not a lot you can do to manipulate a
> Method object.

And why is that a good thing? A method is bound to some object, from which
(via a class, possibly a singleton class) some symbol will access it. Why
should this structure not be accessible from the method? Performance?

I have an exactly parallel questions about argument lists. I should be able
to access the argument list of a method or an unbound method. If all
arguments are positional it _may_ be ok to lose the argument names (though I
would vote to keep them accessible). If any of the arguments are 2.0 keyword
arguments it would be a big mistake to not have any way to access their
names. And even here I think the access should return argument objects, not
just symbols or strings; but again I don't know if there are some
performance reasons for not doing these.

Matz, could you share your thoughts or leanings?