I actually have a commit already made, but I realized there is one possible complication that I may have overlooked: if there are keys in __kwdefaults__ that don't correspond to any explicitly-named arguments in the signature, will those get ignored or could they cause problems?
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 2:11 PM Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > The implementation starts here: > > https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/ecb035cd14c11521276343397151929a94018a22/Objects/funcobject.c#L499 > > The argument clinic input specifying the signature is a few lines above. > Clinic's output is here: > https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/Objects/clinic/funcobject.c.h > > I suspect that the omission is just an oversight. You should probably just > open a bug on bugs.python.org. If you feel like contributing code, not > just bug reports, try working on a pull request! (See the devguide: > https://devguide.python.org/) > > Good luck! > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 6:33 AM Gus Wiedey <guswie...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I was recently playing around with decorators and experimenting with >> defining a function's signature dynamically at runtime, and came across the >> builtins.function class constructor (more easily accessible through the >> types.FunctionType alias). I quickly realized, however, that even though >> the constructor has a parameter (argdefs) that is used to specify default >> values for the resulting function's positional arguments, there is no >> corresponding parameter for keyword-only argument defaults. This seems like >> a glaring omission, especially considering the fact that argdefs takes a >> tuple that is directly assigned (unmodified) to the __defaults__ attribute. >> I can't find any obvious reason why there shouldn't be a similar "kwdefs" >> parameter that takes a dict and assigns it to __kwdefaults__. I downloaded >> the cpython repo, made this change myself as proof-of-concept, and compiled >> it, and it appears to work fine. This brings me to two questions: >> >> 1. Is there a reason for this disparity that I'm not seeing (e.g. >> breaking some other feature), or is it just an oversight? >> 2. If I wanted to submit this as an actual language change, would I need >> to write a full PEP or is it small enough that it could go to the issue >> tracker? (Note that the documentation says this constructor can vary >> between implementations, so the change would only apply to cpython if that >> matters.) >> >> Also, if this is the wrong place to ask this, please feel free to set me >> straight; I'm completely new to this whole process, so any help on where to >> start would be appreciated. >> _______________________________________________ >> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ >> Message archived at >> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/3ETG4HAKR2WQWAKAFCHU4UMC5X37OHKZ/ >> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >> > > > -- > --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) > *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* > <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/> >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/CRS754VE34GJ5XUGJDJINJRH5LR3VDO7/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
