[Python-Dev] Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators

[Tim Peters]

[Guido]
> I still think it shouldn't be needed.  Do we have to add 'currently'
> to every statement about the language?  That doesn't make sense.  The
> reference manual's title page already includes a version number.
> Shouldn't that be sufficient warning for those who want to interpret
> any part of the manual as a promise for all future?

Yes.

> I really want to take a hard stance on this, because I believe the
> only reason this came up was that someone needed to find an argument
> against '@'.

At least two reasonably popular Python tools use @ heavily now, and
their authors didn't appear to give a rip about decorators one way or
the other.  The use of @ for any purpose in the core would have
elicited similar concern.

> I don't think their argument would have a chance in court,

I believe they agree with that (partly because they both said so <wink>).

> so there's no reason to give in to them.

Courts are adversarial.  You don't want an adversarial relationship
with Python users -- there are lots of things to consider besides what
a court would say.

> Fight the trend to add silly disclaimers everywhere!

+1.  OTOH, I'm also +1 on picking a character and promising (in the
reference manual) that the language will never use it, to give authors
of these kinds of tools a way to live peacefully with Python
evolution.  @ seems like a good choice for that.