[Python-Dev] Re: method decorators (PEP 318)

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 06:27 PM 3/28/04 -0500, Robert Mollitor wrote:
>
>>     Robert> ... there is a trivial workaround if we restrict the transformer
>>     Robert> list to identifiers:
>>
>>     Robert> sync = synchronized(lockattr="baz")
>>     Robert> def func [sync] (arg1, arg2):
>>     Robert>     pass
>>
>>I think restricting decorators to only be identifiers would be shortsighted.
>>I can understand having to create workarounds for unforseen situations, but
>>it's clear at this point in the discussion that decorator functions might
>>need to accept parameters.  Why not let them?
>
>It is easier to expand a public grammar than it is to shrink one.

And it's better to cripple a syntax extension in order to justify making a 
second syntax extension that's a crufty workaround for the crippling?  That 
doesn't make any sense to me.