newsgroups at jhrothjr.com
Wed Mar 24 13:42:38 CET 2004
"Jess Austin" <jaustin at post.harvard.edu> wrote in message
news:e4e0340c.0403232103.7fd0d6b0 at posting.google.com...
> Ronald Oussoren <oussoren at cistron.nl> wrote in message
news:<mailman.266.1080024073.742.python-list at python.org>...
> > On 23-mrt-04, at 1:15, Jess Austin wrote:
> > > class foo(object):
> > > def __foo_method(...)
> > > ....
> > > bar = decorator1(__foo_method)
> > > baz = decorator2(__foo_method, arg1, arg2)
> > >
> > > I can't imagine the exact use for this, but I can imagine that there
> > > could be a use. If the syntax remains as it is, that is. This PEP
> > > seems to shoot itself in the foot in this respect.
> > The syntax in PEP318 is syntactic sugar for the most common use of
> > function decorators, the current syntax would still be supported.
> That's good to hear. Should this be made explicit in the PEP?
I don't know how you would unsupport it, actually. It's
simply a function call, after all.
More information about the Python-list