[Python-Dev] PEP 318 - generality of list; restrictions on
elements
Michael Hudson
mwh at python.net
Thu Mar 11 05:42:38 EST 2004
Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> writes:
> In any case, *I* would prefer not to let the semantics require
> anything, and to make this just a (preferred) shorthand for applying
> arbitrary transformations to something that starts out as a function.
Sense at last <wink>!
> Two additional thoughts:
^^^
"No-one expects..."
> 1) I'm not sure I like using the same syntax for classes; the use
> cases are so different that using similar syntax only adds
> confusion, and I think the use cases for classes are a lot weaker
> than for methods.
This is a marginal point, in my view.
> 2) The syntax should also apply to regular functions.
I wasn't aware that only applying it to methods had even been
considered for the tiniest fraction of an instant. It would be
painful to implement and a transparently bad idea.
> 3) It needs to be crystal clear that the list of transformations is
> applied at function/method definition time, not at class definition
> time (which is later, after all the methods have been collected in
> a namespace).
Given 2), that the syntax works for functions, I think this follows.
Besides, I can't think of a sane way of implementing the opposite...
Cheers,
mwh
--
I would hereby duly point you at the website for the current pedal
powered submarine world underwater speed record, except I've lost
the URL. -- Callas, cam.misc
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list