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").
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).
Regards,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
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