Re:In CPython, types implemented in C are part of the type tree
by chrismorgan on Thursday December 24, 2020 @02:54PM
(#25530848)
Ah, gotcha. But I don’t think that that’s actually a difference—it’s just a slight terminology change around “type” and “class”, which I think may have been related to tidying up old-style classes. (That is: yeah, if you’re comparing old-style classes, it may have been a difference (I’m not certain), but I believe it’s completely superficial once you’re comparing the recommended form of classes for the last quite a few years of Python 2.)
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:In CPython, types implemented in C are part of the type tree
by eesmith on Thursday December 24, 2020 @03:12PM
(#25530988)
I agree.
I'm pretty sure the word "class" here comes from the repr for types, in Objects/typeobject.c :
static PyObject *
type_repr(PyTypeObject *type)
{
...
if (mod != NULL && !_PyUnicode_EqualToASCIIId(mod, &PyId_builtins))
rtn = PyUnicode_FromFormat("<class '%U.%U'>", mod, name);
else
rtn = PyUnicode_FromFormat("<class '%s'>", type->tp_name);
...
which is used later on when defining the "type" type: PyTypeObject PyType_Type = {
PyVarObject_HEAD_INIT(&PyType_Type, 0)
"type", /* tp_name */
...
(reprfunc)type_repr, /* tp_repr */
That is, Python 3 has no actual "class" type, so it's not correct to say that '"type" is an instance of "class."'(I could be wrong - I'm no expert at the Python internals.)