[Python-3000] The case for unbound methods?

[Steven Bethard]

On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Anthony Tolle <artomegus at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 3:28 PM, Steven Bethard <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  Why is it so crucial that "self" is the first argument?  If I use a
>  >  decorator that adds a new element to the beginning of the argument
>  >  list, I wouldn't be surprised that I now have to write my methods as::
>  >
>  >     @add_initial_argument
>  >     def method(new_arg, self, ...):
>  >         ...
>
>  That would work with class binding in Python 3.0 (i.e. "unbound"
>  methods).  In Python 2.5, doing that with an unbound method would
>  throw an error.

>>> def add_initial_argument(func):
...     def f(*args, **kwargs):
...         return func('newarg', *args, **kwargs)
...     return f
...
>>> class C(object):
...     @add_initial_argument
...     def foo(newarg, self):
...         print newarg
...
>>> C().foo()
newarg
>>> C.foo(C())
newarg

I don't see an error thrown with either the bound or unbound methods...

STeVe
-- 
I'm not *in*-sane. Indeed, I am so far *out* of sane that you appear a
tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity.
        --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy