fix support for obj parameter of Class.from_parent

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

in c99c7d0#r38397315 @blueyed noted a ignored optional parameter

as far as i remember this is a refactoring artifact i accidentally left,
i should ensure it can be used

[blueyed]

Class never took an obj.
I've noticed this when optimizing things to use passed-in objects.

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

@blueyed as i said its a refactoring artifact i accidentally left

it will be revisited as pretty much everything should try to use passed in objects

[blueyed]

it will be revisited as pretty much everything should try to use passed in objects

Yeah. I've came across this when noticing that typically both FunctionDefinition and Function are being created - both creating the obj etc.

As for your "please coordinate" comment on #7052 you might want to provide some reference to why FunctionDefinition is needed / what's the plan with it.

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

Functiondefinition is the node which represents a function without parameterization, its collect method should run generate_tests

[blueyed]

i should ensure it can be used

Will it be named obj then still? Function uses callobj for it currently/already.

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

yes, , obj is the intenral/semantical name used in practically all nodes, the function object using callobj will deprecate/disappear with the introduction of functiondefinition in the collection tree