[Python-3000] yes to class decorators

[Josiah Carlson]

"Steven Bethard" <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
> 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.

That's neither here nor there.  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...
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-March/062942.html

The use-cases that Tomer brought up were also brought up in various
posts within that same thread, and in the 3+ previous threads extending
prior to March 2005 in the python-dev list (when I noticed that class
decorators didn't make it into 2.4); namespaces, singletons, easy
'metaclass' chaining, whole class manipulations, properties, etc.

The syntax already exists and I would imagine that there's a patch
around somewhere.  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 .

 - Josiah