-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 400
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
FuzzyAttribute
actually should be named as FuzzyFunction
#961
Comments
Agreed on principle. There needs to be a deprecation period for this transition, as many codebases rely on FuzzyAttribute signature. The outline should be:
|
Or just check if the given callable takes no arguments, if true - raise a warning. |
That's a good suggestion indeed, although the existing The implementation I envision is:
|
It could be more detailed:
These all (of course) in one PR, or even one commit. I will do this, when I will have some free time. It's very doubtful, that it will be soon, so if someone wants to implement it right now - you're free to do this. |
Not in this year 100%, maybe next too. |
The problem
There is
LazyFunction
(takes callable, without args) andLazzyAttribute
(takes callable with one argument - self). But only one fuzzy class -FuzzyAttribute
, which actually takes the same asLazyFunction
.Proposed solution
I would like to see
FuzzyAttribute
that takes callable and argument self in it, and fix this fuzzy naming in fuzzy functions.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: