On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 04:39:03 am Jason R. Coombs wrote:
> I'd like to express additional interest in python patch 1660179,
> discussed here:
>
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/patches/2007-February/021687.html
[...]
> But to me, a compose function is much easier to read and much more
> consistent with the decorator usage syntax itself.
>
> def meta_decorator(data):
> return compose(dec_register_function_for_x, dec_alter_docstring,
> dec_inject_some_data(data))
Surely that's better written as:
meta_decorator = compose(dec_register_function_for_x,
dec_alter_docstring, dec_inject_some_data)
> I admit, I may be a bit biased; my first formal programming course
> was taught in Scheme.
Mine wasn't -- I've never even used Scheme, or Lisp, or any other
functional language. But I've come to appreciate Python's functional
tools, and would like to give a +0.5 to compose(). +1 if anyone can
come up with additional use-cases.
--
Steven D'Aprano
_______________________________________________
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
