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

[Barry Warsaw]

On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 21:07, Neil Schemenauer wrote:

> That's not apparent to me.  It seems to me that most people just got
> sick of the endless debate and tuned out.  The people who had urgent
> need for the feature were probably a bit more persistent.
> Personally, I don't see the cost vs. benefit of the feature to be
> compelling.  It seems there is not a lot you can do with a decorator
> without resorting to ugly hacks (e.g. messing with bytecode).

I disagree.  I've written a lot of code that uses pre-pie decorators,
but it's all fairly localized.  It isn't spread out in every module, but
it's contained, e.g., within a database package (wrap mutators in
transaction handling decorators).  Those use my own custom decorator,
but in almost all other examples (in my own code -- I know others have
different use cases), the decorators are built-ins like property,
staticmethod, etc.

For me, the benefit is significant because while I would still continue
to use this particular feature, I think the pie decorator syntax makes
the code /more/ readable, or more readable in the right way and in the
right place.

In general, I predict most Python code will continue to be blissfully
unadorned with decorators.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20040804/2436bbc3/attachment-0001.pgp