function attributes are like function objects

[Fredrik Lundh]

Tim Peters wrote:
> [/F]
> > well, if people are too lazy to write
> >
> >     def f(...):
> >        ...
> >     a[f] = "something"
> >
> > do you really think they'll find it much easier to write:
> >
> >     def f(...):
> >         ...
> >     f.a = "something"
>
> Believe it or not, I do.  Bets?  Don't forget methods when deciding how easy
> the first alternative is, and that decorating methods (not top-level
> functions) is the primary cause of docstring abuse.

Works for methods too:

    class Spam:
        a = {}
        def f(...):
            ...
        a[f] = "something"

You can dig it out with a one-liner (or 2-3 lines, if you want a
more general version -- put it in the "code" module, where it
belongs...)

> > -- face it, "because we can" isn't a very good argument
> > when deciding what to add to the language core...)
>
> Hmm.  I suppose the PEP would be that much stronger had Barry thought to
> mention this argument <ahem>:
>
>     http://python.sourceforge.net/peps/pep-0232.html

Sure looks like "because we can" to me...

Or maybe "because it's more fun to hack the core than to hack
the library".  (For some reason, the python-devers seem to prefer
writing C/Java over Python...)

On the other hand, this isn't such a big deal, especially not com-
pared to some of the stuff I've seen on python-dev lately.  I'm
pretty sure a third-party python implementer can ignore function
attributes, and nobody will ever notice...

Cheers /F