[Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Thu Aug 5 19:14:48 CEST 2004
> Does this mean that the C#-style syntax has a chance if it's got a
> __future__? :)
I don't see how that would change the arguments against it.
> Also, you might want to define "superior" in order to avoid
> re-opening the floodgates of syntax argument.
No, but I suggest that the proponents of syntax alternatives will have
to agree amongst themselves on a single alternative that they can
present to me.
> With regard to the PEP, I thought there were two volunteers who
> mentioned an intent to work on it in the past week; if they are not
> still doing so, I'd be happy to at least add the issues with "def
> decorator functionname()" that I remember (visual confusion for
> decorators w/arguments, tool confusion for existing tools).
Please do (or coordinate with Skip who seems to have attracted this
> Do you want justifications, too? :-)
That's up to you. :-)
> I would beg of you to not give the idea that you or anyone else is
> going to be counting votes on this at some point.
Python is not a democracy. I can't be swayed by votes, only by good
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-Dev