[Python-Dev] Another approach to decorators.

["Martin v. Löwis"]

Martin Zarate wrote:
> @ means nothing to an uninformed eye.  This violates the most important 
> feature of Python (imho) which is that it is "runnable pseudocode".  A coder 
> will see what "def" or "class" or "import" means just by looking at it.  @ is 
> meaningless.

I think it is irrelevant that @ means nothing in this context. Python 
will still be runnable pseudo-code. Remember that the decorator will read

   @staticmethod

So the eye unfamiliar with Python may wonder what the @ means. As you 
suggest, it means nothing, and the reader will see the staticmethod 
after it, and guess (correctly): "this somehow make a static method".

> I submit that a reserved keyword would fit much better in the @ place.  

To the uninformed eye, this would be harmful. It may have a grasp what a 
static method is, and that you have to declare it. However, what does 
the additional keyword mean? The uninformed eye will try to put a 
meaning into it, but there is none. The unformed eye will never guess 
how static methods work in Python - that the method is actually an 
object, that "staticmethod" is actually a type, and this all is a 
constructor call, assigning to the name of the function.

> I'm sure you can all think of something better than @.

Actually, I can't. Your post just convinced me that a keyword can never
be better.

Regards,
Martin