Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #29210

Re: Decorators not worth the effort

Show all headers | View raw

[Sorry, my Firefox destroyed the indent...

Am 14.09.2012 22:29 schrieb Terry Reedy:

> In other words
>
> def make_wrapper(func, param):
> def wrapper(*args, **kwds):
> for i in range(param):
> func(*args, **kwds)
> return wrapper
>
> def f(x): print(x)
> f = make_wrapper(f, 2)
> f('simple')
>
> # is simpler, at least for some people, than the following
> # which does essentially the same thing.
>
> def make_outer(param):
> def make_inner(func):
> def wrapper(*args, **kwds):
> for i in range(param):
> func(*args, **kwds)
> return wrapper
> return make_inner
>
> @make_outer(2)
> def f(x): print(x)
> f('complex')

For this case, my mydeco.py which I use quite often contains a

def indirdeco(ind):
     # Update both the outer as well as the inner wrapper.
     # If we knew the inner one was to be updated with something
     # from *a, **k, we could do it. But not this way...
     @functools.wraps(ind)
     def outer(*a, **k):
         @functools.wraps(ind)
         def inner(f):
             return ind(f, *a, **k)
         return inner
     return outer

so I can do

@indirdeco
def make_wrapper(func, param):
     @functools.wraps(func)
     def wrapper(*args, **kwds):
         for i in range(param):
             func(*args, **kwds)
     return wrapper

and then nevertheless

@make_wrapper(2)
def f(x): print(x)

BTW, I also have a "meta-decorator" for the other direction:

def wrapfunction(mighty):
     """Wrap a function taking (f, *a, **k) and replace it with a
     function taking (f) and returning a function taking (*a, **k) which
     calls our decorated function.
     Other direction than indirdeco."""
     @functools.wraps(mighty)
     def wrapped_outer(inner):
         @functools.wraps(inner)
         def wrapped_inner(*a, **k):
             return mighty(inner, *a, **k)
         wrapped_inner.func = inner # keep the wrapped function
         wrapped_inner.wrapper = mighty # and the replacement
         return wrapped_inner
     wrapped_outer.func = mighty # keep this as well
     return wrapped_outer

With this, a

@wrapfunction
def twice(func, *a, **k):
     return func(*a, **k), func(*a, **k)

can be used with

@twice
def f(x): print (x); return x

very nicely.


Thomas

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Python presentations Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmichel@sequans.com> - 2012-09-13 19:54 +0200
  Re: Python presentations Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2012-09-13 18:18 +0000
  Decorators not worth the effort alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-09-13 18:58 -0700
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2012-09-14 12:12 +1000
      Re: Decorators not worth the effort alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-09-13 20:25 -0700
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> - 2012-09-14 08:40 +0200
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-09-14 16:29 -0400
      Re: Decorators not worth the effort Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2012-09-15 09:13 +0200
      Re: Decorators not worth the effort alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-09-16 17:38 -0700
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-09-14 16:31 -0400
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-09-14 16:37 -0400
      Re: Decorators not worth the effort 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-18 16:47 -0700
      Re: Decorators not worth the effort 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-18 16:47 -0700
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-09-14 16:33 -0400
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2012-09-14 15:16 -0600
      Re: Decorators not worth the effort Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-09-14 23:39 +0000
        Re: Decorators not worth the effort 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-15 02:45 -0700
          Re: Decorators not worth the effort Dwight Hutto <dwightdhutto@gmail.com> - 2012-09-15 06:04 -0400
            Re: Decorators not worth the effort 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-15 07:18 -0700
              Re: Decorators not worth the effort Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2012-09-18 14:16 +0200
            Re: Decorators not worth the effort 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-15 07:18 -0700
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort Dwight Hutto <dwightdhutto@gmail.com> - 2012-09-14 23:42 -0400
    Re: Decorators not worth the effort "Dieter Maurer" <dieter@handshake.de> - 2012-09-15 08:31 +0200

csiph-web