Allow classes as protocol implementations #13501
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Contributor
|
According to mypy_primer, this change has no effect on the checked open source code. 🤖🎉 |
ilevkivskyi
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 25, 2022
I forgot to add this to yesterdays PR #13501
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #4536
This use case is specified by PEP 544 but was not implemented. Only instances (not class objects) were allowed as protocol implementations. The PR is quite straightforward, essentially I just pass a
class_objflag everywhere to know whether we need or not to bind self in a method.cc @JukkaL