In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Qopit wrote:
> I'm
> a big fan of Python's ability to easily rebind everything in sight, but
> this particular usage seems like a strange abuse I wouldn't expect a
> code-checker to be able to figure out. I'll just avoid writing
> confusing code like that... it's not only confusing to a program, but
> to a human as well! Dynamically massacring a function definition (as
> opposed to just rebinding a new implementation) like that seems odd to
> me.
Well it's a contrived example. But taking a function or method and wrap
it with some other function or method isn't that uncommon. For methods
there is even syntactic sugar: decorator syntax.
Here's a more useful dynamic function wrapping::
def debug_trace(func):
def wrapper(*args, **kwargs):
print 'Calling %s' % func.__name__
print 'args: %r' % (args,)
print 'kwargs: %r' % kwargs
func(*args, **kwargs)
return wrapper
def test(a, b, c):
print 'just a test', a, b, b
test = debug_trace(test)
test(1, 2, 3)
test(1, 2)
Here it's quite clear to a human reader that the wrapping doesn't change
the number of arguments. But it's harder to let a program figure this out.
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
