Christophe Schlick wrote:
* Is the idea interesting enough to deserve consideration for possible inclusion in the language? If yes, should I transform this proposal into a PEP, or should there first be some pre-PEP discussion here (or maybe in python-dev)?
Decorators were one of the biggest successes in recent years, so we would be foolish to dismiss the idea of simplifying them out of hand. But I think you are doing yourself a disservice by referring to this proposal as "new syntax". Normally when people talk about syntax, they are referring to language syntax (i.e. a change to the Python interpreter), and we're pretty conservative about adding new syntax. It seems to me that you're talking about a new idiom for building decorator functions, not new syntax. I would suggest you also publish this decorator-builder recipe on ActiveState's Python cookbook, and see if you get much interest there. It might also help to post a link to your recipe to python-list@python.org. You certainly should do those things before going to python-dev.
* Are there some pitfalls involved with the use of NSD that I haven't seen? Or are there additional desirable elements that could be easily included?
Have you timed the decorated function using new and old style? If you decorator a function with (say) 5 arguments, is there any performance hit to your NSD? Do you have any tests for it? E.g. unit tests, regression tests? Your code looks opaque and complicated to me, I would want to see a good test suite before even considering using it in production code, let alone in the standard library. -- Steven