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

Steven Bethard steven.bethard at gmail.com
Mon Mar 13 00:12:46 CET 2006

On 3/12/06, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at verizon.net> wrote:

[Nick Coghlan] > 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").

I like "functools" for a different reason -- the name is sufficiently broad so that we don't have fret about whether a particular tool fits within the module's scope. In contrast, a name like "functional" suggests that some of these tools don't quite fit.

FWIW, +1 here. Especially if we're only going to add two functions -- partial, which is already accepted, and Georg's decorator -- it seems like overkill to introduce a module for each. I agree that "functools" is a better module name if both partial and decorator are going in there.

STeVe

Grammar am for people who can't think for myself. --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list