On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote: > [me] >> Although it *is* somewhat handy for quick introspection at the >> interpreter prompt... maybe I should document it after all. Thoughts? > > IMO show_code() is not a good name, because the only thing it doesn't > do is to -- show the code. > > I'd rather call it "codeinfo" (which also is more in line with current > dis module function names). And, indeed, the variant I added that just returns the formatted string instead of printing it directly to stdout is called dis.code_info. dis.show_code is the existing helper that Guido added way back in 2007. As the checkin comment from back then put it, it shows you everything the interpreter knows about the code object except the details of the bytecode (which is already covered by dis.dis). So while I agree the name isn't great, I also don't think it is wrong enough to bother changing. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
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