<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Steven D'Aprano <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:steve@pearwood.info" target="_blank">steve@pearwood.info</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">Larry Hastings wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
[...]<br>
"Changes to the Signature object, or to any of its data members,<br>
do not affect the function itself."<br>
<br>
which leaves the possibility that __signature__ may no longer match the actual argument spec, for some reason. If you remove getfullargspec, people will have to reinvent it to deal with such cases.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
There's no reason why they should disagree. The "some reason" would be if some doorknob decided to change it--the objects are mutable, because there's no good reason to make them immutable.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Nevertheless, the world is full of doorknobs, and people will have to deal with their code.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is also Python, the language that assumes everyone is an consenting adult.</div><div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
The case for deprecating getfullargspec is weak. The case for deprecating it *right now* is even weaker. Let's not rush to throw away working code.<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br></div></div></blockquote><div>
<br></div><div>If people really want to keep getullargspec() around then I want to at least add a note to the function that signature objects exist as an alternative (but not vice-versa). I personally still regret the getopt/argparse situation and this feels like that on a smaller scale.</div>