Roundup Robot added the comment:
New changeset fcfaca024160 by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default':
Issue #12428: Add a pure Python implementation of functools.partial().
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/fcfaca024160
--
nosy: +python-dev
___
Python
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
Sorry for the delay. I have now committed the patch to 3.4 (default). Thank you!
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: commit review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
versions: +Python 3.4 -Python 3.3
___
Python
Eric Snow added the comment:
The following from the changeset left me with questions:
-from _functools import partial, reduce
+try:
+from _functools import reduce
+except ImportError:
+pass
* Why the try block when there wasn't one before?
* Should reduce be added to __all__ only
Brian Thorne added the comment:
* Why the try block when there wasn't one before?
* Should reduce be added to __all__ only conditionally?
My mistake, the try block should have just covered the import of partial - that
is after all the exceptional circumstance we can deal with by using the
Eric Snow added the comment:
Possibly reduce could be handled in a similar way with a fallback python
implementation? Otherwise your suggestion of conditionally adding it to
__all__
makes sense to me.
In the meantime I'd expect the import of _functools.reduce to not be wrapped in
a try
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
Possibly reduce could be handled in a similar way with a fallback python
implementation? Otherwise your suggestion of conditionally adding it to
__all__
makes sense to me.
In the meantime I'd expect the import of _functools.reduce to not be
wrapped
Brian Thorne added the comment:
Back to a simpler closure implementation of partial and skip the repr test for
python implementation.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26697/functools.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Brian Thorne hardb...@gmail.com added the comment:
Thanks Antoine, the __class__ attribute wasn't useful, I've removed that.
Overriding the __setattr__ and __delattr__ gives consistent behaviour with the
both versions - allowing the unittest reuse. Also I've changed thread back to
_thread.
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Le mardi 24 juillet 2012 à 06:00 +, Brian Thorne a écrit :
Isn't more compatibility between the Python and C implementations
desired?
IMHO, not when compatibility regards obscure details such as whether
setting an attribute is allowed or
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Why does the pure Python version of partial have to be so complicated?
I don't think the __class__, __setattr__ and __delattr__ are useful. As Raymond
said, only the core, documented functionality needs to be preserved, not
implementation
Changes by Brian Thorne hardb...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +jackdied
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12428
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +ezio.melotti
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12428
___
___
Brian Thorne hardb...@gmail.com added the comment:
I've updated the patch to address the comments here and in the code review.
I added more cross testing of the pure Python implementation of partial - as
you pointed out inheritance wasn't supported so I changed from the simple
closure to a
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com added the comment:
Just noticed one minor nit with the patch: the pure Python version of
functools.partial should support func as a keyword argument that is passed to
the underlying object. The trick is to declare a positional only argument like
this:
def
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com added the comment:
Also, the closure based implementation should be decorated with @staticmethod
(see http://bugs.python.org/issue11704) and the tests updated accordingly.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Brian's patch looks ok to me. There's a missing newline (or two) just before
test_main() but that can easily be fixed on commit.
--
nosy: +pitrou
stage: - commit review
versions: +Python 3.3 -Python 3.2
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Ezio and I made further minor comments that can be handled by the person doing
the commit; I’d like to do it.
--
nosy: +eric.araujo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Brian Thorne hardb...@gmail.com added the comment:
Cheers for the comments Eric. I've modified the patch accordingly.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22801/functools2.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
New submission from Brian Thorne hardb...@gmail.com:
The test coverage for functools was down around ~60%, this is a patch to bring
that up to ~98%.
Made two changes to the Lib/functools.py file itself:
1) Moved the Python implementation of partial into Lib/functools.py from
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com added the comment:
Raymond, do we care whether or not the pure Python version of functools.partial
supports inheritance and instance testing?
The constructor is technically documented as returning a partial object
rather than a simple staticmethod instance with
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com added the comment:
Raymond, do we care whether or not the
pure Python version of functools.partial
supports inheritance and instance testing?
We don't care. The docs make very few
guarantees beyond the core functionality.
Everything else is an
21 matches
Mail list logo
