Development

[dimitri-yatsenko]

Fixed issue #178

[eywalker]

Why add more lines of code unncessarily? Since we are using inspect, we should just use inspect.getmembers rather than manually traversing dir and applying if selection.

[dimitri-yatsenko]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think inspect.getmembers actually evaluates every member. So if there is a computed property, e.g. _populated_from, it will actually trigger its computation. In contrast, the proposed implementation looks at the names first and only evaluates members if they start with a capital letter. So it avoids extra computations.

[eywalker]

I see your concern. As long as you are invoking inspect.getmembers on a class and that there is no member that implements __get__, no additional computation is performed. However, I see that you have reintroduced classproperty concept, and if such thing is present, indeed inspect.getmembers will evaluate the class property.

Also, since _populated_from is directly set equal to a relation object, there is no real trigger of computation caused by just accessing the member, if that's what you are concerned with.

[dimitri-yatsenko]

I thought property implemented __get__. No?

[dimitri-yatsenko]

The default AutoPopulate._populated_from is a property that loads dependencies, looks up parents, and returns the join of the parents.

[eywalker]

The property and thus _populated_from doesn't run the function unless it's run on an instance. That's why I was saying that as long as you invoke inspect.getmembers on a class (which is what we'd do anyway), the content of the _populated_from will not be evaluated.

[dimitri-yatsenko]

Then I don't feel too strongly about it. It seems that inspect is designed for inspecting objects during debugging with no regard for performance. inspect.getmembers seems to be doing a lot more work than necessary.