On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 9:26 PM, Simon Cross <hodgestar+python...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> > wrote: >> Namespace conflict with what? I would prefer "wraps" unless it's >> standardized as a behavior for all decorators. > > Having the original function available as __wrapped__ would be really > cool, although I'm not quite sure what the behaviour should be in > corner cases like: > > * The decorator returns the original function (I suppose a reference > to itself is okay?) > * The decorator returns the a function that is already decorating > something else.
Those are the corner cases that make it more appropriate to have this as a behaviour of functools.update_wrapper() (and hence the functools.wraps() decorator) rather than built in to the decorator machinery. The change will just add the following line to update_wrapper(): wrapper.__wrapped__ = wrapped Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
