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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #56644

Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests

Show all headers | View raw

On 11Oct2013 14:42, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> writes:
> > On 11Oct2013 02:55, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> > > def undecorate(f):
> > >     """Return the undecorated inner function from function f."""
> > >     return f.func_closure[0].cell_contents
> >
> > Whereas this feels like black magic. Is this portable to any decorated
> > function? If so, I'd have hoped it was in the stdlib. If not: black
> > magic.
> 
> What would you expect? The purpose of decorating functions is to do
> magic to make it appear as though the original function isn't there any
> more. Any technique to getting at that original function anyway is *of
> course* going to look like black magic at the implementation level.

Sigh. Yes of course. It is no uglier than walking a frame stack etc.

But is it reliable? Will it work on any decorated function?

If so, fine, and I'd be happy to squirrel it away as a useful
standard incantation for something.

If not, then it's nasty only-mostly-reliable magic and I either
want little to do with it, OR I want to know its specific limitations
so I know when to use it and when not.
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au>

But pessimism IS realism!       - D.L.Bahr

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

Thread

Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2013-10-11 15:36 +1100
  Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-11 05:51 +0000
    Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2013-10-11 17:40 +1100

csiph-web