gagsl-py2 at yahoo.com.ar
Wed May 6 05:59:59 CEST 2009
En Tue, 05 May 2009 22:35:08 -0300, Rhodri James
<rhodri at wildebst.demon.co.uk> escribió:
> On Tue, 05 May 2009 21:43:16 +0100, <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote:
>>> It is easy to change all references of the function name, except for
>>> those in the function body itself? That needs some explantation.
>> I can answer this. If I have a recursive function, I may want to
>> create a similar function, so I copy and paste it, to later modify the
>> copied version. Then to change its name I usually don't use a search &
>> rename of its name into its block of code because it's usually
>> useless. In non-recursive functions the name of the function is stated
>> only once, at the top.
> I'm sorry, but while I'm mildly positive towards the proposal (and more
> so towards Aaron's decorator), I don't buy this argument at all. What
> is broken about your editor's global search-and-replace function that
> makes it "usually useless" for making these name changes?
It happened to me sometimes. If a module defines some functions, and it
doesn't *use* them, why should I use a global search-and-replace to rename
something? Modifying the "def" line should be enough - unless the function
happens to be recursive.
It's the DRY principle in action, the same argument as when decorators
where introduced: there should be no need to repeat the function name
again and again.
More information about the Python-list