namespaces and eval

[dave.g1234 at gmail.com]

On May 16, 2:47 pm, "bruno.desthuilli... at gmail.com"
<bruno.desthuilli... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 mai, 23:23, dave.g1... at gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the responses.  I'm well aware that the function can be
> > passed in the parameters, passing in the functino as an arg defeats
> > the purpose of what I'm going after.
>
> Why so ?
> > @ Arnaud - Nice. I'm not sure what the performance of mine vs. yours,
> > but a perfunctory glance looks like we're doing the close to the same
> > thing.  Maybe one advanage to doing it wrap(x).foo().... is that you
> > can pass in other parameters to foo.
>
> I may be wrong (if so please pardon my lack of intelligence and/or
> provide a couple use case), but it looks like you're trying to
> reinvent partial application.
>
> from functools import partial
> def foo(x, y):
>   return x + y
>
> pfoo = partial(foo, 2)
> print pfoo(42)
>
> Don't know if this helps...

Ok, so that solves the issue of the aforementioned compose function.
We could do compose( partialfoo,....) ) etc (although I might say I
prefer wrap(x).foo(23).foo(16 ..etc )  The original idea was to
provide wrapper around an object that lets you call abritrary
functions on that object with it as a parameter - i.e., as if it were
a method in a class.  The partial function was only a component of the
code I posted earlier. Or am I missing something you're saying?

best
dave