[Python-3000] yes to class decorators
steven.bethard at gmail.com
Thu Nov 16 04:55:56 CET 2006
On 11/15/06, tomer filiba <tomerfiliba at gmail.com> wrote:
> i understand there's a green light for class decorators in py3k,
> so i wanted to give the issue a slight push.
"Steven Bethard" <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, most of the arguments against PEP 359 were along the lines of,
> "well you can do that with a metaclass already, so we don't really
> need any new syntax", but you may be able to get around those
> arguments because the decorator syntax already exists.
On 11/15/06, Josiah Carlson <jcarlson at uci.edu> wrote:
> Here's a post from Guido in response to Phillip and Greg in which he
> says more or less; someone write a PEP so that we can get them
> into 2.6 and Py3k...
Thanks for the link.
> If Tomer (or someone else) writes a PEP, I don't see why (the
> previously overlooked) class decorators shouldn't make it into
> 2.6 and 3.0 .
So the purpose of this thread then is to write the PEP? If so, my
comments about the use cases are still valid. If they weren't
convincing use cases before, they're not likely to be convincing use
cases for a PEP.
Or was there another purpose of the thread?
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
More information about the Python-3000