On 1/24/06, Simon Belak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you serious enough about this to warrant a ticket? I can do the > rewrite of our standard decorators as either way I need to do something > to make the new error handling work in all it's glory. > > Though in the long run I would still like to see true invariants.
I'm not sure how we'd implement the features we have with true invariants. What this module offers at least makes the new function masquerade very convincingly as the original. I do think that using decorator() from this library will make our decorators much nicer to read *and* give them the original signature. However, the one thing it doesn't do is let as add additional parameters, which is something we need to be able to do. Right now, decorator() takes a function with a signature (func, *args, **kw). Maybe we should extend it to allow additional named arguments which are automatically not passed to the enclosed function. > Anybody willing to "setuptoolify" the library? I took at a look at it. It's one module with a PSF license. I think the easiest thing to do is just take it and drop it into the turbogears package with a comment at the top saying where it came from. If it ever becomes a more packaged, err, package then we can just remove ours. Kevin
