[issue19660] decorator syntax: allow testlist instead of just dotted_name
New submission from James Powell: Decorator syntax currently allows only a dotted_name after the @. As far as I can tell, this was a gut-feeling decision made by Guido. [1] I spoke with Nick Coghlan at PyTexas about this, and he suggested that if someone did the work, there might be interest in revisiting this restriction. The attached patch allows any testlist to follow the @. The following are now valid: @(lambda x:x) def f(): pass @(spam if p else eggs) def f(): pass @spam().ham().eggs() def f(): pass [1] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046711.html -- components: Interpreter Core messages: 203456 nosy: james priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: decorator syntax: allow testlist instead of just dotted_name type: enhancement versions: Python 3.4, Python 3.5 ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue19660> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19660] decorator syntax: allow testlist instead of just dotted_name
Changes by James Powell : -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file32717/decorator-syntax.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue19660> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19660] decorator syntax: allow testlist instead of just dotted_name
James Powell added the comment: I see this as removing a restriction and a special-case from the decorator syntax (noting, of course, that these were introduced deliberately.) In terms of whether the new forms are improvements, my preference is to leave this up to the judgement of the programmer, moderated of course by their prevailing coding guide. I would argue that this change does not force any additional complexity on the programmer (who is free to take or leave it) or on the interpreter (- the straightforwardness of the patch corroborates this.) I would also argue that there are certainly cases where, in the midst of some large codebase, the dotted_name restriction may seem a bit arbitrary. This is likely true for: class Foo: def bar(self, func): return func @staticmethod def baz(func): return func @staticmethod def quux(): def dec(func): return func return dec # invalid @Foo().bar def f(): pass # valid @Foo.baz def f(): pass # valid @Foo.quux() def f(): pass For completeness' sake, I have attached a patch with an additional unit test and amended documentation. Should we proceed with writing a PEP for Python 3.5? -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file32741/decorator-syntax.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue19660> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19660] decorator syntax: allow testlist instead of just dotted_name
Changes by James Powell : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file32745/decorator-syntax.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue19660> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue10933] Tracing disabled when a recursion error is triggered (even if properly handled)
Changes by James Powell : -- nosy: +james, r.david.murray ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue10933> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue10933] Tracing disabled when a recursion error is triggered (even if properly handled)
James Powell added the comment: We investigated this issue with pdmccormick & r.david.murray. The behaviour appears to be intentional. If the trace function raises an Exception, system tracing is disabled entirely. See attached documentation patch to clarify this. -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38908/issue_10933.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue10933> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17380] initproc return value is unclear
Changes by James Powell : -- nosy: +james ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue17380> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17380] initproc return value is unclear
James Powell added the comment: See attached patch to clarify this in the docs. -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38910/issue_17380.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue17380> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17380] initproc return value is unclear
Changes by James Powell : -- nosy: +r.david.murray ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue17380> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue23934] inspect.signature reporting "()" for all builtin & extension types
James Powell added the comment: Discussed with Nick Coghlan. See attached patch to return `signature(object)` only if both `__new__` and `__init__` are shared with `object`. Otherwise, raise TypeError indicating built-in types not supported. https://docs.python.org/3/library/inspect.html#inspect.signature "Raises ValueError if no signature can be provided, and TypeError if that type of object is not supported." -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38936/issue_23934.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue23934> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue23934] inspect.signature reporting "()" for all builtin & extension types
James Powell added the comment: See attached patch for unittest. For 3.4, test that inspect.signature(str) raises TypeError. For >3.5, this can be improved to use _testcapi.matmulType -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38949/issue_23934-test.patch ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue23934> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
