On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrenced...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 10:39:30 AM UTC+12, Ian wrote: >> Sorry, but you're the one who doesn't seem to get it. Because it's a >> decorator, "your" function is replacing the caller's function in the >> caller's namespace. > > No it is not. The replacement happens here: > > def generated_decorator(func) : > return \ > decorator(func, *args, **kwargs) > #end generated_decorator > > As you can see, the function being called, “decorator”, is supplied by the > caller. The function being decorated, “func”, is supplied by the caller > (along with the additional *args and **kwargs). And the returned function is > returned *as-is*, so whatever docstring was assigned by the caller is *NOT* > “clobbered”.
I'm talking about the docstring of the *decorator*, not func. I agree that whatever docstring func has is entirely up to func and the decorator, not your code. Here again is the example I posted earlier: >>> @decorator_with_args ... def my_decorator(func, *args, **kwargs): ... """Returns func unmodified.""" ... return func ... >>> my_decorator.__doc__ 'generates a decorator which applies my_decorator to the given arguments' I never made any claim about the docstring of the decorated func. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
