[Python-Dev] decorator module patch (original) (raw)

Georg Brandl g.brandl at gmx.net
Sun Mar 12 23:11:31 CET 2006

Nick Coghlan wrote:

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").

+1 from me. I'll happily make the according changes if that reaches a consensus.

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).

I suppose it would be okay, since as a decorator it can only be applied to functions.

In PEP 356, there is even a suggestion to "add builtin @deprecated decorator?".

Cheers, Georg

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list