Add missing types to __builtin__

[foom]

BPO	1009811
Nosy	@loewis
Files	addbuiltin.patch

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2007-03-12.08:58:09.000>
created_at = <Date 2004-08-16.05:00:18.000>
labels = ['interpreter-core']
title = 'Add missing types to __builtin__'
updated_at = <Date 2007-03-12.08:58:09.000>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/foom'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2007-03-12.08:58:09.000>
actor = 'loewis'
assignee = 'none'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Interpreter Core']
creation = <Date 2004-08-16.05:00:18.000>
creator = 'foom'
dependencies = []
files = ['6189']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 1009811
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 5.0
messages = ['46715', '46716', '46717', '46718', '46719']
nosy_count = 3.0
nosy_names = ['loewis', 'collinwinter', 'foom']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'postponed'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue1009811'
versions = ['Python 2.4']

[foom]

Add most of the missing type objects to __builtin__.

Adds the following:
ellipsis (not to be confused with Ellipsis, which is the object of this
type)
builtin_function_or_method
dictproxy
generator
PyCObject
classobj
instance
instancemethod
cell
NoneType
NotImplementedType
frame
function
module
traceback
code

Does not add the rest of the names mentioned in my email, as I'm
unsure if they got an approval or were silently ignored. I'm not
convinced that it's a good idea to put the rest in __builtin__, myself.

See also:
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/
047754.html>
and
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/
047830.html>

[loewis]

Logged In: YES
user_id=21627

I don't like to see further __builtin__ pollution, so I
recommend to reject this patch.

[collinwinter]

I agree with Martin. This is going to be taken care of in Python 3 (somehow) regardless.

[foom]

I only submitted this because I was directed to. To reiterate, the actual problem is that the classes claim to be defined in a place they aren't actually defined in.

Quoting myself:
Sooo should (for 'generator' in objects that claim to be in __builtin__ but aren't),

1. 'generator' be added to __builtin__
2. 'generator' be added to types.py and its __module__ be set to 'types'
3. 'generator' be added to <newmodule>.py and its __module__ be set to '<newmodule>' (and a name for the module chosen)

Me, I'm pretty much agnostic towards which solution is chosen, and if this one isn't it, fine with me. I just want to see python be truthful about where types are defined, whatever form that takes.

[loewis]

There are more options, e.g. __module__ set to None, and generator being in no module. I think this is the one I would prefer. In any case, it seems very difficult to achieve consensus on this, so it just won't get fixed for the moment.