[Python-Dev] PEP 443 - Single-dispatch generic functions

[Éric Araujo]

Hi,

Thanks for writing this PEP.  Blessing one implementation for the stdlib
and one official backport will make programmers’ lives a bit easier :)

>   >>> @fun.register(int)
>   ... def _(arg, verbose=False):
>   ...     if verbose:
>   ...         print("Strength in numbers, eh?", end=" ")
>   ...     print(arg)
>   ...

Does this work if the implementation function is called like the first
decorated function? (I don’t know the proper terminology) e.g.

    >>> @fun.register(int)
    ... def fun(arg, verbose=False):
    ...     if verbose:
    ...         print("Strength in numbers, eh?", end=" ")
    ...     print(arg)

The precedent is 2.6+ properties, where prop.setter mutates and returns
the property object, which then overwrites the previous name in the
class dictionary.

> * the current implementation relies on ``__mro__`` alone, making it
>   incompatible with Abstract Base Classes'
>   ``register()``/``unregister()`` functionality. A possible solution has
>   been proposed by PJE on the original issue for exposing
>   ``pkgutil.simplegeneric`` as part of the ``functools`` API
>   [#issue-5135]_.

Making generic functions work with ABCs sounds like a requirement to me,
as ABCs are baked into the language (isinstance).  ABCs and interfaces
(i.e. zope.interface) are really neat and powerful.

> * the dispatch type is currently specified as a decorator argument. The
>   implementation could allow a form using argument annotations. This
>   usage pattern is out of scope for the standard library [#pep-0008]_.
>   However, whether this registration form would be acceptable for
>   general usage, is up to debate.

+1 to passing the type as argument to the decorator and not supporting
annotations.  It’s simple and works.


Question: what happens if two functions (say in two different modules)
are registered for the same type?