On Apr 5, 11:49 am, kj <no.em...@please.post> wrote:
> In <4bb802f7$0$8827$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com> Steven D'Aprano
> <st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> writes:
>
> >On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 22:58:43 +0000, kj wrote:
> >> Suppose I have a function with the following signature:
>
> >> def spam(x, y, z):
> >> # etc.
>
> >> Is there a way to refer, within the function, to all its arguments as a
> >> single list? (I.e. I'm looking for Python's equivalent of Perl's @_
> >> variable.)
> >Does this help?
> >>>> def spam(a, b, c=3, d=4):
> >... pass
> >...
> >>>> spam.__code__.co_varnames
> >('a', 'b', 'c', 'd')
>
> That's very handy. Thanks!
>
> >The hardest part is having the function know its own name.
>
> Indeed. Why Python does not provide this elmentary form of
> introspection as a built-in variable is extremely puzzling to me
> (even--no, *more so*--after reading PEP 3130).
>
The Rejection Notice in the PEP certainly not give very many details
for why the PEP was rejected.
The first question in the Open Issues could easily be answered "yes."
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
