Ken> We haven't even seen a satisfactory approach to referring to the
Ken> function, itself, from within the function. Maybe it's not even
Ken> desirable to be able to do that - that's an interesting question.
I hereby propose that within a function the special name __ refer to the
function. You could have
def fact(n):
if n <= 1: return 1
return __(n-1) * n
You could also refer to function attributes through __ (presuming Barry's
proposed patch gets adopted):
def pub(*args):
if __.access == "private":
do_private_stuff(*args)
else:
do_public_stuff(*args)
...
if validate_permissions():
pub.access = "private"
else:
pub.access = "public"
When in a bound method, __ should refer to the bound method, not the unbound
method, which is already accessible via the class name.
As far as lexical scopes are concerned, this won't change anything. I think
it could be implemented by adding a reference to the function called __ in
the local vars of each function.
--
Skip Montanaro | http://www.mojam.com/
skip@mojam.com | http://www.musi-cal.com/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4