[Python-Dev] Re: python-dev Summary for 2004-06-16 through 2004-06-30 [draft]

[Brett Cannon]

David Abrahams wrote:

> Brett Cannon <bac at OCF.Berkeley.EDU> writes:
> 
> 
>>------------------------------------------------
>>Function decorators in 2.4 ... maybe
>>------------------------------------------------
>>The topic of whether function decorators would go into 2.4, and if so
>>with what syntax, continued to be debated from the `last
>>summary`_. Beyond reference implementations, nothing really changed.
>>Overall people agreed they would like to see it in 2.4 using whatever
>>syntax Guido chooses (and he has three in mind, so no more
>>suggestions!), but if he felt the need to wait then functionality
>>would be held off for 2.5 .
>>
>>Contributing threads:
>>   - `functions decorators in 2.4?
>>     <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-June/045440.html>`__
>>   - `decorators and 2.4
>>     <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-June/045516.html>`__
> 
> 
> Was the possibility of "no special syntax; do it within the language"
> really unworthy of mention in the summary?
> 

I would be happy to add a mention, but with Guido not saying that was a 
possibility I just didn't think about it.  It is no way meant to suggest 
I think anything is "unworthy" in terms of what you, Philip, and 
everyone else who helped come up with that implementation.  The 
summaries are just what I happen to think of when I write the summary 
(which is a first draft; I don't proof-read as I am sure some of you may 
have noticed  =).

I am not trying to make any value-judgments, but I am in no way putting 
a major effort into being unbiased; I'm not paid enough to care about 
pushing a little propoganda for my views.  =)  But that was not 
happening here.  I just didn't think that much about it.  It honestly 
just connected in my brain as another syntax suggestion, albeit an 
unobtrusive one.

Personally the whole thread did not interest me terribly.  This whole 
topic has just worn me out slightly in terms of reading it since it has 
been discussed for ages and I have read **every** email (by forcing 
myself at this point) on the subject on this list.  I could quite easily 
live the rest of my life without reading another syntax suggestion for 
function decorators (as I am sure Guido could as well).

-Brett