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

Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Sat Aug 7 23:57:57 CEST 2004


"Guido van Rossum" <guido at python.org> wrote in message
news:200408071612.i77GCcK10255 at guido.python.org...
>Do we have to add 'currently' to every statement about the language?

Of course not.  I would draw the line with one more.

> I really want to take a hard stance on this

In that case, perhaps we should draw the line at one less and remove the
current 'currently'.  Then, no one like me could cite it as precedent;-).

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

Depends on the lawyers.  As their lawyer, I would argue something like the
followihng:  1. Programming, like the law, requires careful writing.  In
addition to the C code, the Python Reference Manual is also carefully
written.  2. While anything and everything could theoretically change in
the next version, there are implicit and explicit promises that that will
not happen.  Also, some things are *much* more stable than others.  3. The
Python manual uses 'forbidden' rarely.  Its use is never necessary.  Since
the Ref Man is carefully written, its use must be intentional, to convey a
nuance of meaning.  The rational inference is that the nuance is that of
considerably more permanence than for other things.

Enough, I think.

Terry J. Reedy





More information about the Python-Dev mailing list