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


Groups > comp.lang.python > #105523

Re: monkey patching __code__

From dieter <dieter@handshake.de>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Subject Re: monkey patching __code__
Date 2016-03-23 09:24 +0100
Message-ID <mailman.37.1458721466.2244.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
References <56EBEB5A.7050207@mail.de> <CAG93HwGKrN8y3k=3OFtHq-PbMjFzy=1U99-ZuJOLdEq69gosfg@mail.gmail.com> <56EED3DE.7050101@mail.de> <CAG93HwFr-yFqjex_U4yZs5WUuLCCbCJDJfso2Kp6G0F3BdKOZQ@mail.gmail.com> <56F13417.8060108@mail.de>

Show all headers | View raw


"Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de> writes:
> ...
> As far as I can see, the code replacement approach solves the problem
> once and for all. Thus is far more stable.
>
> Manually finding out every single module that might or might not have
> imported "reverse" before we could monkeypatch it might result in a
> maintenance nightmare (just think about a Django upgrade).

But you have observed that you cannot do everything with a
code substitution: a function call does not only depend on the code
but also on other properties of the function object: e.g. the
parameter processing.

You might be able to change them in a similar way as "__code__" (i.e.
direct modification). Otherwise, you would need to construct a new
"function object" -- and lose the possibility to completely
change the function object in place.

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


Thread

Re: monkey patching __code__ dieter <dieter@handshake.de> - 2016-03-23 09:24 +0100

csiph-web