Maybe also have it substitute in the function's default args, if default args take extra work (though it would take extra memory (new local variables) and probably doesn't give any savings).

On Jan 14, 2016 1:08 PM, "Victor Stinner" <> wrote:
> 2016-01-14 11:32 GMT+01:00 Franklin? Lee <>:

> > Concerns:
> > 1. Is it possible to correctly determine, for a given function, which
> > positional parameters have which names?
> I think so. Just "read" the function prototype no? Such info is
> available in AST.
> > 2. Is it possible to change a function object's named parameters some
> > time after it's created (and inspected)?
> What do you think?

I'm not too familiar (yet) with the details of the AST.

I had function wrappers in mind. In particular, I would like to permit "faked"/computed function signatures for wrappers based on what they wrap (e.g. lru_cache, partial), and I'm not sure (though I suspect) that computed signatures are compatible with immutable signatures (that is, fixed upon creation).

(Sorry for the double-mail, Victor. I will try to remember not to post from the phone.)