Signature objects (which has been lightly discussed on python-3000, but I realize should be retargeted to 2.6 since there is no incompatibility problems) are the idea of having an object that represents the parameters of a function for easy introspection. But there are two things that I can't quite decide upon.
One is whether a signature object should be automatically created for every function. As of right now the PEP I am drafting has it on a per-need basis and have it assigned to __signature__ through a built-in function or putting it 'inspect'. Now automatically creating the object would possibly make it more useful, but it could also be considered overkill. Also not doing it automatically allows signature objects to possibly make more sense for classes (to represent __init__) and instances (to represent __call__). But having that same support automatically feels off for some reason to me. The second question is whether it is worth providing a function that will either figure out if a tuple and dict representing arguments would work in calling the function. Some have even suggested a function that returns the actual bindings if the call were to occur. Personally I don't see a huge use for either, but even less for the latter version. If people have a legit use case for either please speak up, otherwise I am tempted to keep the object simple. Now, I probably won't be participating in this discussion for the rest of the week. I am driving down to the Bay Area from Seattle for the next few days and have no idea what my Internet access will be like. But I wanted to get this discussion going since it kept me up last night thinking about it and I would like to sleep by knowing python-dev, in its infinite wisdom <grin>, is considering the issues. =) -Brett _______________________________________________ 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
