Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
Make IPv{4,6}Address.version and max_prefixlen available on classes, not just instances
#118710
Labels
type-feature
A feature request or enhancement
Comments
|
This seems reasonable to me. |
|
While there is a tiny downside of these technically becoming writable even though they're supposed to be read only attributes... this is Python and what you ask for seems practical. Agreed, lets do it. |
They don't become any more writable then they already are. Currently, they can be assigned on the type objects but not on the instances. This will remain. For example, in the current version of Python, it is possible to write |
encukou
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 4, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Feature or enhancement
Proposal:
Sometimes, when there is a function that can operate both on IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, it is convenient to pass it the corresponding type object (either
IPv4AddressorIPv6Address) as an argument. However, that function cannot access the propertiesversionandmax_prefixlenusing those type objects, because they only work on instances. This can be worked around by constructing a dummy instance (e.g.t(0).max_prefixlen), but it would be more convenient if those properties could be used on the type object directly (i.e.t.max_prefixlen), because their value doesn't depend on the specific instance, only on the type.The proposal is to make
IPv4Address.version,IPv4Address.max_prefixlen,IPv6Address.version, andIPv6Address.max_prefixlenevaluate to 4, 32, 6, and 128, respectively. Currently, all those expressions evaluate to property descriptors.Has this already been discussed elsewhere?
This is a minor feature, which does not need previous discussion elsewhere
Links to previous discussion of this feature:
No response
Linked PRs
IPv*Addressclass properties #120698The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: