Re: [Python-3000] PEP 3100 Comments

[Ronald Oussoren]

On 8-mei-2006, at 8:58, Talin wrote:

And *how* exactly would you implement your isFunction test
so as to detect the "naive, everyday concept of a function"
that you seem to want, in a way that does any better job
than the current callable()?

user defined functions, built-in functions, and similar objects; It

think of as functions.

In other words, a function that does what most people expect it to, by
conforming to their intuitive idea of what a function is, rather than

This 'isFunction' test that I am thinking of would only return true for would not return true for classes or other objects that are technically functions in a mathematically pure sense, but which normal people don't some grammatical or mathematical definition. And in cases of ambiguity, it would be conservative, returning false negatives but not false positives.

But why would this be useful? Using objects with a __call__ method as a

state).

If isFunction would return false for such objects it is likely that such
objects would be rejected at some places where I'd like to use them.

Ronald

function is useful at times (such as with callback functions or to remember

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com