Home Original page

[Python-Dev] decorator module patch

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sun Mar 12 22:29:49 CET 2006 
Alex Martelli wrote:
> On Mar 12, 2006, at 11:16 AM, Ian Bicking wrote:
>     ...
>> memoize seems to fit into functools fairly well, though deprecated not
>> so much.  functools is similarly named to itertools, another module  
>> that
>> is kind of vague in scope (though functools is much more vague).
>> partial would make just as much sense in functools as in functional.
> 
> Couldn't we merge functools and functional into just one (user- 
> visible) module? The distinction between what goes into one vs the  
> other is exceedingly subtle and poor users will be guessing as to  
> what's where. If we need a mixed module with something in C and  
> something in Python, we can do it the usual way, func.py wrapping  
> _func.pyd (or .so or whatever)...


I agree it makes sense to have "decorator", "memoize", "deprecated" and 
"partial" all being members of the same module, whether the name be 
"functools" or "functional" (although I have a slight preference for 
"functools" due to the parallel with "itertools").

On the question of whether or not deprecated fits in as a function tool, I 
know I'd tend to only use it on functions (to deprecate a class, I'd simply 
decorate the class's __init__ or __new__ method).

Regards,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
             http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list