On Oct 17, 7:16 pm, "Aaron \"Castironpi\" Brady"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> George Sakkis has a recipe that might help.
>
> http://code.activestate.com/recipes/551779/
Looks like just the thing. Thanks!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Oct 17, 12:37 pm, Dan Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 17, 6:17 pm, "Chris Rebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you want/need this magical g() function considering that, as
> > you yourself point out, Python already performs this normalization for
> > you?
>
> A caching idea
On Oct 17, 6:17 pm, "Chris Rebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why do you want/need this magical g() function considering that, as
> you yourself point out, Python already performs this normalization for
> you?
A caching idea I'm playing around with.
@cache
def some_query(arg1, arg2):
# May
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Dan Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given some function, f(a, b, c=3), what would be the best way to go
> about writing a function, g(f, *args, **kwargs), that would return a
> normalized tuple of arguments that f would receive when calling
> f(*args, **kwargs)?
On Oct 17, 5:13 pm, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You'd get a lot further a lot faster by looking at the documentation for
> the inspect module instead.
Yeah, I've looked at that already, but it only gives (in a nicer way)
the information I already have from the function object and it
Dan Ellis wrote:
> Given some function, f(a, b, c=3), what would be the best way to go
> about writing a function, g(f, *args, **kwargs), that would return a
> normalized tuple of arguments that f would receive when calling
> f(*args, **kwargs)? By normalized, I mean that the result would always
>
