Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Meta decorator with parameters, defined in explicit functions
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:02:27 +1000
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <mailman.61.1467090177.2358.python-list@python.org>
References: <85mvm5vrbw.fsf@benfinney.id.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cancel-Lock: sha1:uKZ/mXSpkvPfv0bZvXPp3+irsmY=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux)
Precedence: list
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:110646

Howdy all,

I want an explicit replacement for a common decorator idiom.

There is a clever one-line decorator that has been copy-pasted without
explanation in many code bases for many years::

    decorator_with_args = lambda decorator: lambda *args, **kwargs: lambda func: decorator(func, *args, **kwargs)

My problem with this is precisely that it is clever: it explains nothing
about what it does, has many moving parts that are not named, it is
non-obvious and lacks expressiveness.

Even the widely-cited ActiveState recipe by Peter Hunt from 2005
<URL:http://code.activestate.com/recipes/465427-simple-decorator-with-arguments/>
gives no clue as to what this is doing internally nor what the names of
its parts should be.

I would like to see a more Pythonic, more explicit and expressive
replacement with its component parts easily understood.

-- 
 \     “[H]ow deep can a truth be — indeed, how true can it be — if it |
  `\             is not built from facts?” —Kathryn Schulz, 2015-10-19 |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney