Ron_Adam wrote:
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:55:35 -0400, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ron_Adam wrote:
Ok, that post may have a few(dozen?) problems in it. I got glitched
by idles not clearing variables between runs, so it worked for me
because it was getting values from a previous run.
This should work better, fixed a few things, too.
The decorators can now take more than one argument.
The function and arguments lists initialize correctly now.
Ron:
I've followed your attempts to understand decorators with interest, and
have seen you engage in conversation with many luminaries of the Python
community, so I hesitate at this point to interject my own remarks.
I don't mind. It might help me communicate my ideas better.
In a spirit of helpfulness, however, I have to ask whether your
understanding of decorators is different from mine because you don't
understand them or because I don't.
Or it's just a communication problem, and we both understand.
Communicating is not my strongest point. But I am always willing to
clarify something I say.
You have several times mentioned the possibility of a decorator taking
more than one argument, but in my understanding of decorators this just
wouldn't make sense. A decorator should (shouldn't it) take precisely
one argument (a function or a method) and return precisely one value (a
decorated function or method).
It doesn't work with functions with more than one variable. It seems
tuples don't unpack when given to a function as an argument. Any way
to force it?
What I was referring to is the case:
@decorator(x,y,z)
As being a decorator expression with more than one argument. and not:
@decorator(x)(y)
This would give a syntax error if you tried it.
@d1(1)(2)
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
The problem I had with tuple unpacking had nothing to do with
decorators. I was referring to a function within the class, and I
needed to be consistent with my use of tuples as arguments to
functions and the use of the '*' indicator.
Do you understand what I mean when I say a decorator should take one
function as its argument and it should return a function?
regards
Steve
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Cheers,
Ron
So what you are saying is that you would like to be able to use
arbitrarily complex expressions after the :at" sign, as long as they
return a decorator? If so, you've been "pronounced" :-)
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 703 861 4237 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming http://pydish.holdenweb.com/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
