J2 proposal: keyword

[Arthur]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:38:49 -0700, "Robert Brewer"
<fumanchu at amor.org> wrote:

>-Candidates for keywords have fallen into two or three camps, and
>emphasize different aspects of decorators: 
>
>-Declarative: declare, predef, moddef 
>-Transformative: transform, wrap, modify, mutate 
>-Attributive/Annotative: amend, using, having 
>-Directive: pragma, signify 
>-Associative: helper, qualify, qual, meta 
>-Cross-cutting: imbue, endow, bestow, embellish, extend, accum, glom,
>confer
>-Prepositions/Adverbs: using, through, per, via, by

There is only consensus as to what any of those words would mean, in
context. Make happen:

foo=whatever(foo)

Some of us - at least one of us - find that a point with real
significance. It cannot be said better than it is being said, is the
point,  

And I think it is stretching things to an extreme to imply that the
poll results reflect a concensus of the community in any direction.
There is a more fundamental lack of consensus as to whether Guido
should allow himself to be influenced by these kinds of polls.

I do not have blind faith in Guido's instincts. I do think he is in a
unique position to see the Big Picture of all the issues and forces at
work.  Being at the center of the storm.

So in the end I might have ended up doing exactly what I have accused
others of doing in other cases - reading into the @decorator syntax
decision (assuming *some* syntax is a fait accompli) - finding it to
be wise, for reasons perhaps beyond its intentions.

Art