<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Definitely looks interesting. I'd like it more if it was more explicit,
> but still, it does look nice.
>
> I guess you could make it recursion-safe if you saved/restored the
> global "__" variable before/after calling the actual function, and
> probably there's a way to make it thread-safe, too. But how would you
> make it generator-safe? Also, wouldn't lambda's you pass around from
> object to object be bound to use the wrong instance? How would you fix
> this code:
>
> class TestA:
> @memberFunction
> def do(f):
> print f()
>
>
> class TestB:
> @memberFunction
> def do(x):
> x.do(lambda : __)
>
> TestB().do(TestA()) # should print out TestB, does print out TestA
>
>
> There really should be something like a wiki for
> "selfishness"-proposals with pros and cons, so I could have looked at
> some before thinking about my own one...
>
Here's another pass:
__ = None #initialize global __
def memberFunction(f):
def func(self,*args,**kwargs):
global __
save__ = __
globals()["__"] = self
try:
return f(*args,**kwargs)
finally:
__ = save__
func.__name__ = f.__name__
func.__doc__ = f.__doc__
func.__dict__.update(f.__dict__)
return func
class Test:
@memberFunction
def __init__(x,y):
__.x = x
__.y = y
@memberFunction
def mult():
"Multiply the two member vars"
return __.x * __.y
t = Test(5,4)
print t.mult()
print dir(t)
print t.mult.__doc__
class TestA:
@memberFunction
def do(f):
print f()
class TestB:
@memberFunction
def do(x):
z = __ # lambda's shouldn't directly reference '__'
x.do(lambda : z)
TestB().do(TestA())
Prints out:
20
['__doc__', '__init__', '__module__', 'mult', 'x', 'y']
Multiply the two member vars
<__main__.TestB instance at 0x009DA4E0>
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
