I would think that would be a great name, it’s more explicit and fits more in with its siblings “lru_cache” and “cached_property”.
Not to imply that there is a consensus to move forward, I would be interested in knowing what the next steps would be if there was. Would this require a PEP to be submitted? Or is it similar enough to existing functionality that it might not require one?
On 27 Apr 2020, at 19:37, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:26:53 -0700Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
Or are you saying that once could be interpreted to mean I cannot do that 2nd def?
That is what I was saying -- that `once`, all by itself, could mean multiple things.
That's a good point. A more explicit spelling would be `@call_once`,what do you think?(that's also the C++ spelling, incidentally, but I suspect mostbeginners won't care about that ;-))RegardsAntoine._______________________________________________Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.orgTo unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.orghttps://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/NYOB46XXHLPDK3V7IPQL6IJ6FNE2ZK7S/Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/