Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com added the comment:
That's a lot of boilerplate for minimal gain. The Django commenter was right -
proposals that start with everybody in the world needs to do X differently
from the way they do it now for this to be useful aren't ever likely to gain
much
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
I have added people from the nosy list of #9567. What do you think about this
idea?
--
nosy: +eric.araujo, ncoghlan, r.david.murray, rhettinger
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com added the comment:
How?
It was easy for wraps to add the __wrapped__ attribute, since it has access to
both the wrapping function and the function being wrapped.
But it hasn't got a clue as to the identity of the decorator that is applying
the wrapper.
Absent
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
I concur with Nick. If you want to develop your __DECORATORS__ idea further,
it should be done off-list. ISTM, this is more of a shot in the dark than a
concrete plan to solve known, real problems.
--
resolution:
Mitar mmi...@gmail.com added the comment:
Here is the concrete code how I imagined that:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/13854
So this would be not made in code of `wraps` function, but would be contract
for implementers to do it, if they want to be visible (maybe they still do not
want
New submission from Mitar mmi...@gmail.com:
Sometimes it is useful to be able to check which decorators are already applied
to a function, especially when you are constructing them dynamically. I am
proposing that for all decorators in Python would be suggested that they
maintain a list of
