On 2:59 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
snip
def __call__(self, func=None):
if func is None:
return self._call()
self.func = func
return self
def _call(self):
print(\n + self.char * 50)
self.func()
print(self.char * 50 + '\n')
Lie Ryan lie.1...@gmail.com wrote:
Simplicity is one, using @decor() means you have at least three-level
nested functions, which means the code is likely to be very huge and
perhaps unnecessarily.
If you don't like the extra level of function nesting that you get from
returning a decorator
yes for this case you will have to use @memoize() as all the arguments are
optional ...
Thanks,
J
--- On Tue, 28/6/11, Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Using decorators with argument in Python
To: Jigar Tanna poisonousratt...@gmail.com
: Using decorators with argument in Python
To: python-list@python.org
Date: Tuesday, 28 June, 2011, 10:36 PM
On 06/29/2011 02:52 AM, Jigar Tanna wrote:
coming across to certain views from people, it is not a good practice
to use
decorators with arguments (i.e. @memoize() ) and instead it is good
On 2:59 PM, Lie Ryan wrote:
Can any of you guys explain me advantages and disadvantages of
using each of them
Simplicity is one, using @decor() means you have at least three-level
nested functions, which means the code is likely to be very huge and
perhaps unnecessarily.
Bruce Eckel pointed
John Posner wrote:
Investigating how this fact fit in with the current thread, I came up
with an alternative to the three levels of def (pronounced three
levels of death). Following is code for two decorators:
* the first one encloses the output of a function with lines of #
characters, and is
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
How about just having one bit of code that works either way?
How would you adapt that code if you wanted to be able to decorate a
function that takes arguments?
This also won't work if the argument to the decorator is
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
How about just having one bit of code that works either way?
How would you adapt that code if you wanted to be able to decorate a
function that takes arguments?
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
8
class enclose(object):
func = None
def __init__(self, char='#'):
self.char = char
if callable(char): # was a function passed in
Ian Kelly wrote:
@enclose
def test5(string, func):
print(func(string))
test5('broken', func=str.upper)
Yes, that is a limitation -- one loses the func keyword for the
decorated function. If I were to actually use this, I'd probably go
with '_func' as the keyword.
~Ethan~
PS
Thanks
I am new to Python and Django, was going through the concept of
decorators
where I came across a special case of using arguments with decorators
Below is the code for memoization where I was looking at the
concept...
cache = {}
def get_key(function, *args, **kw) :
key = '%s. %s: ' %
On 06/29/2011 02:52 AM, Jigar Tanna wrote:
coming across to certain views from people, it is not a good practice
to use
decorators with arguments (i.e. @memoize() ) and instead it is good to
just
use @memoize. Can any of you guys explain me advantages and
disadvantages of
using each of
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Jigar Tanna
poisonousratt...@gmail.com wrote:
coming across to certain views from people, it is not a good practice
to use
decorators with arguments (i.e. @memoize() ) and instead it is good to
just
use @memoize. Can any of you guys explain me advantages and
Jigar Tanna poisonousratt...@gmail.com writes:
where I came across a special case of using arguments with decorators
A decorator is a function which takes exactly one parameter, and returns
a function based on that parameter.
URL:http://docs.python.org/glossary.html#term-decorator
14 matches
Mail list logo
