On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:38 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This reminds me, if we ignore the performance aspect, function
> attributes provide this functionality, but there's a significant
> problem with using them because you can't access them other than by
> referencing the *name* of the function being defined.
Yeah, I mentioned that earlier, but just as one of the wide variety of
variously-clunky ways to achieve the same thing. I think it's
semantically the closest, but defining the initial value *after* the
function is pretty unexciting.
> It would be nice to have a better way to reference function attributes
> from within a function. (This would also help write recursive
> functions that could be safely renamed, but I'm not sure many people
> would necessarily think that's a good thing ;-))
The interaction with renaming isn't particularly significant, but the
interaction with decoration is notable. Inside the execution of a
function, you'd have a reference to the innermost function, NOT the
one that would be identified externally. Whether that's a good thing
or a bad thing remains to be seen...
Hmm.
def static(**kw):
def deco(func):
statics = types.SimpleNamespace(**kw)
@functools.wraps(func)
def f(*a, **kw):
func(*a, **kw, _statics=statics)
return f
return deco
@statics(n=0)
def count(*, _statics):
_statics.n += 1
return _statics.n
Add it to the pile of clunky options, but it's semantically viable.
Unfortunately, it's as introspectable as a closure (that is: not at
all).
ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JRDLOROGRHBSRMY3DF2E3VHB3ANIDKRT/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
