[Python-Dev] Re: 2.4a2, and @decorators

[David Abrahams]

Jim Fulton <jim at zope.com> writes:

> to justify the language change. FWIW, It isn't to me.  The new
> syntax is yet another rule that people have to know to understand
> Python code they read. That's OK if it produces enough value to
> justify the burden.  I question whether that's the case here.
>
> Perhsps the difficulty in pickling an acceptable syntax should be
> taken as a warning sign that there's a problem with the feature.

I just want to be clear that I know implementing my proposal involves
an ugly hack, and I'm not fond of it.  Nonetheless, I think it's
important.

I made the proposal in response to exactly the same instinct that Jim
is reflecting here.  If people really need a prefix syntax for
decorators it would be best to at least _start_ with an implementation
that doesn't involve core language changes, because the whole area
looks quite perilous from a language design point of view.

I'm saying without any desire to change Guido's mind about '@', but
just to explain the reasons that I brought up the idea in the first
place.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com