On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Yury Selivanov yselivanov...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2012-06-06, at 9:00 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
So, the idea for the 'signature(obj)' function is to first check if
'obj' has '__signature__' attribute set, if yes - return it, if no -
create a new one (but don't
Hello,
I am hoping that this list is a good place to ask this question.I am
still fairly new to python, but find it to be a great scripting
language.Here is my issue:
I am attempting to utilize a function to receive any sequence of letter
characters and return to me the next value in
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:32 PM, jdmorgan jdmor...@unca.edu wrote:
Hello,
I am hoping that this list is a good place to ask this question.
Close, but not quite the right place. This is a list for the design
and development *of* Python itself, rather than a list for using
Python.
For this kind
On Jun 2, 2012 6:21 AM, r.david.murray python-check...@python.org wrote:
+ For example, ``'ab c\n\nde fg\rkl\r\n'.splitlines()`` returns
+ ``['ab c', '', 'de fg', 'kl']``, while the same call with
``splinelines(True)``
+ returns ``['ab c\n', '\n, 'de fg\r', 'kl\r\n']``
Wouldn't that be
Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
This is also Python, the language that assumes everyone is an consenting
adult.
Exactly, which is why I'm not asking for __signature__ to be immutable. Who
knows, despite
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
I've presented use cases for doing this already. Please stop calling me
stupid.
I'm sorry Nick, I missed your email and my choice of words was poor. Please
accept my apologies.
Thanks and no
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 11:08:09 +0100, Sam Partington sam.parting...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Jun 2, 2012 6:21 AM, r.david.murray python-check...@python.org wrote:
+ Â For example, ``'ab c\n\nde fg\rkl\r\n'.splitlines()`` returns
+ Â ``['ab c', '', 'de fg', 'kl']``, while the same call with
On 6 Jun 2012, at 18:28, Yury Selivanov wrote:
On 2012-06-06, at 1:13 PM, Alexandre Zani wrote:
A question regarding the name. I have often seen the following pattern
in decorators:
def decor(f):
def some_func(a,b):
do_stuff using f
some_func.__name__ = f.__name__
return
On 2012-06-07, at 9:28 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 6 Jun 2012, at 18:28, Yury Selivanov wrote:
On 2012-06-06, at 1:13 PM, Alexandre Zani wrote:
Never copy attributes by hand, always use 'functools.wraps'. It copies
'__name__', '__qualname__', and bunch of other attributes to the decorator
Nick,
On 2012-06-07, at 2:56 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Yury Selivanov yselivanov...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 2012-06-06, at 9:00 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
So, the idea for the 'signature(obj)' function is to first check if
'obj' has '__signature__' attribute set, if
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
We'll probably extend it to copy __signature__ too; then
'signature(decor(f))'
will be the same as 'signature(f)'.
I don't think functools.wraps can copy the signature by default - it's not
uncommon to have
On 06/06/2012 11:56 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
I'd say return a copy in the first case to be safe against accidental
modification. If someone actually wants in-place modification, they
can access __signature__ directly.
I really don't understand this anxiety about mutable Signature objects.
Can
On 06/06/2012 06:00 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Eric Snowericsnowcurren...@gmail.com wrote:
Furthermore, using __signature__ as a cache may even cause problems.
If the Signature object is cached then any changes to the function
will not be reflected in the
Hello,
The new revision of PEP 362 has been posted:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0362/
Thanks to Brett, Larry, Nick, and everybody else on python-dev
for your corrections/suggestions.
Summary of changes:
1. We don't cache signatures in __signature__ attribute implicitly
2. signature()
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:00:29 -0700, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 06/06/2012 11:56 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
I'd say return a copy in the first case to be safe against accidental
modification. If someone actually wants in-place modification, they
can access __signature__
On 2012-06-07, at 10:45 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:00:29 -0700, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 06/06/2012 11:56 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
I'd say return a copy in the first case to be safe against accidental
modification. If someone actually wants in-place
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM, nick.coghlan python-check...@python.org wrote:
-* If the metaclass hint refers to an instance of ``type``, then it is
+* If the metaclass hint refers to a subclass of ``type``, then it is
considered as a candidate metaclass along with the metaclasses of all of
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Yury Selivanov yselivanov...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2012-06-06, at 1:02 PM, Eric Snow wrote:
I'm with Steven on this one. What's the benefit to storing the name
or qualname on the signature object? That ties the signature object
to a specific function. If you
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 06/06/2012 06:00 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Eric Snow ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com
wrote:
Furthermore, using __signature__ as a cache may even cause problems.
If the Signature object is
Eric,
On 2012-06-07, at 12:54 PM, Eric Snow wrote:
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Yury Selivanov yselivanov...@gmail.com
wrote:
I like the idea of 'foo(a)' and 'bar(a)' having the identical signatures,
however, I don't think it's possible. I.e. we can't make it that the
'signature(foo)
On 06/07/2012 10:08 AM, Eric Snow wrote:
I'm missing something here. Can you give me an example of modifying an
existing function object such that its Signature would change? Decorators
implementing a closure with a different signature don't count--they return a
new function object.
I doubt
On 6/7/2012 8:42 AM, nick.coghlan wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/6e4ec47fba6a
changeset: 77369:6e4ec47fba6a
branch: 3.2
parent: 77363:aa9cfeea07ad
user:Nick Coghlanncogh...@gmail.com
date:Thu Jun 07 22:41:34 2012 +1000
summary:
Nudge readers towards a
On 6/7/2012 10:41 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
Hello,
The new revision of PEP 362 has been posted:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0362/
Thanks to Brett, Larry, Nick, and everybody else on python-dev
for your corrections/suggestions.
Summary of changes:
1. We don't cache signatures in
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 6/7/2012 11:45 AM, Daniel Urban wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM, nick.coghlanpython-check...@python.org
wrote:
-* If the metaclass hint refers to an instance of ``type``, then it is
+* If the metaclass hint refers
On 2012-06-07, at 3:54 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 6/7/2012 10:41 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
Hello,
The new revision of PEP 362 has been posted:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0362/
Thanks to Brett, Larry, Nick, and everybody else on python-dev
for your corrections/suggestions.
On 2012-06-07, at 5:39 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 6/7/2012 4:54 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
I think we'll add a 'format' method to the Signature, that will work
like 'inspect.formatargspec'. 'Signature.__str__' will use it with
default parameters/formatters.
Great. If I don't like the
The inaccuracies in the analogy are why this is in the tutorial, not the
language reference. All 3 else clauses are really their own thing. For if
statements, the full construct is if/elif/else, for loops it is
for/break/else and while/break/else and for try statements it is
try/except/else. Early
On 6/7/2012 4:54 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
I think we'll add a 'format' method to the Signature, that will work
like 'inspect.formatargspec'. 'Signature.__str__' will use it with
default parameters/formatters.
Great. If I don't like the default, I could customize.
I'm not sure how __repr__
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 17:39:54 -0400, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 6/7/2012 4:54 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
I think we'll add a 'format' method to the Signature, that will work
like 'inspect.formatargspec'. 'Signature.__str__' will use it with
default parameters/formatters.
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Daniel Urban urban.dani...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM, nick.coghlan python-check...@python.org
wrote:
-* If the metaclass hint refers to an instance of ``type``, then it is
+* If the metaclass hint refers to a subclass of ``type``, then it
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
In other words: this is possible but extremely unlikely, and will only be
done knowingly and with deliberate intent by a skilled practitioner.
I think it's reasonable to declare that, if you're monkeying around with
Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
In other words: this is possible but extremely unlikely, and will only be
done knowingly and with deliberate intent by a skilled practitioner.
I think it's reasonable to declare that, if you're
On 06/07/2012 07:08 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Perhaps func.__signature__ should be a computed the first time it is
accessed?
The PEP already declares that signatures are lazily generated.
signature() checks to see if __signature__ is set, and if it is returns
it. (Or, rather, a deepcopy
On 2012-06-07, at 8:40 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
IMO the __repr__ should make it clear that it is a signature object
somehow.
+1.
-
Yury
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 06/07/2012 07:08 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Perhaps func.__signature__ should be a computed the first time it is
accessed?
The PEP already declares that signatures are lazily generated. signature()
checks to see
Nick,
I'm replying to your email (re 'functools.partial') in python-ideas here,
in the PEP 362 thread, as my response raises some questions regarding its
design.
On 2012-06-07, at 11:40 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Yury Selivanov yselivanov...@gmail.com
wrote:
A comment on the way methods are handled. I have seen decorators that
do something like this:
import functools
def dec(f):
functools.wraps(f)
def decorated(*args, *kwargs):
cursor = databaseCursor()
return f(cursor, *args, **kwargs)
As a result, if the decorated function
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Yury Selivanov yselivanov...@gmail.com wrote:
If you dig up some of the older PEP 362 discussions, you'll find that
allowing developers to reduce this problem over time is the main
reason the Signature.bind() method was added to the PEP. While I
wouldn't
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Alexandre Zani alexandre.z...@gmail.com wrote:
A comment on the way methods are handled. I have seen decorators that
do something like this:
import functools
def dec(f):
functools.wraps(f)
def decorated(*args, *kwargs):
cursor =
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Alexandre Zani alexandre.z...@gmail.com
wrote:
A comment on the way methods are handled. I have seen decorators that
do something like this:
import functools
def dec(f):
40 matches
Mail list logo
