New submission from Alexander Belopolsky <alexander.belopol...@gmail.com>:
Currently applying functools.partial to a callable that is already functools.partial object results in a nested object: >>> from functools import partial >>> def f(a,b,c): pass ... >>> p = partial(partial(f, 1), 2) >>> p.func, p.args (<functools.partial object at 0x100431d60>, (2,)) Proposed patch makes partial(partial(f, 1), 2) return partial(f, 1, 2) instead: >>> p.func, p.args (<function f at 0x10055d3a8>, (1, 2)) This patch is partially (no pun intended) motivated by a patch submitted by Christophe Simonis for issue4331. Christophe's patch flattens nested partials for a specific case of using partials as bound methods. As proposed, the patch will enable flattening for subclasses of functools.partial, but will return a baseclass instance. Flattening will also discard any state attached to the nested partial such as __name__, __doc__, etc or any subclass data. I believe this is the right behavior, but this caveat is the reason I classify this patch as a "feature request" rather than "performance" or "resource usage". ---------- components: Library (Lib) files: no-nested-partial.diff keywords: patch messages: 98674 nosy: Alexander.Belopolsky severity: normal status: open title: Flatten nested functools.partial type: feature request versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file16083/no-nested-partial.diff _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7830> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
