On 4/30/06, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nick Coghlan wrote: > > Collin Winters has done the work necessary to rename PEP 309's functional > > module to functools and posted the details to SF [1]. > > > > I'd like to take that patch, tweak it so the C module is built as _functools > > rather than functools, and then add a functools.py consisting of: > > I'm all for it. (You could integrate the C version of "decorator" from my SF > patch, but I think Python-only is enough).
Stronger -- this should *not* be implemented in C. There's no performance need, and the C code is much harder to understand, check, and modify. I expect that at some point people will want to tweak what gets copied by _update_wrapper() -- e.g. some attributes may need to be deep-copied, or personalized, or skipped, etc. (Doesn't this already apply to __decorator__ and __decorates__? I can't prove to myself that these get set to the right things when several decorators are stacked on top of each other.) I'm curious if @decorator is the right name and the right API for this though? The name is overly wide (many things are decorators but should not be decorated with @decorator) and I wonder of a manual call to _update_wrapper() wouldn't be just as useful. (Perhaps with a simpler API -- I'm tempted to call YAGNI on the __decorator__ and __decorates__ attributes.) I think there are too many design options here to check this in without more discussion. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
