An idiom for code generation with exec

[Lie]

On Jun 21, 2:02 pm, eliben <eli... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 8:52 am, Peter Otten <__pete... at web.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> > eliben wrote:
> > > On Jun 20, 2:44 pm, Peter Otten <__pete... at web.de> wrote:
> > >> eliben wrote:
> > >> > Additionally, I've found indentation to be a problem in such
> > >> > constructs. Is there a workable way to indent the code at the level of
> > >> > build_func, and not on column 0 ?
>
> > >> exec"if 1:" + code.rstrip()
>
> > >> Peter
>
> > > Why is the 'if' needed here ? I had .strip work for me:
>
> > A simple .strip() doesn't work if the code comprises multiple lines:
>
> > >>> def f():
>
> > ...     return """
> > ...     x = 42
> > ...     if x > 0:
> > ...             print x
> > ...     """
> > ...>>> exec "if 1:\n" + f().rstrip()
> > 42
> > >>> exec f().strip()
>
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >   File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
> >   File "<string>", line 2
> >     if x > 0:
> >     ^
> > IndentationError: unexpected indent
>
> I see. In my case I only evaluate function definitions with 'exec', so
> I only need to de-indent the first line, and the others can be
> indented because they're in a new scope anyway. What you suggest works
> for arbitrary code and not only function definitions. It's a nice
> trick with the "if 1:" :-)

Have you actually profiled your code? Or are you just basing this
assumptions on guesses?