[Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators (original) (raw)
Gustavo Niemeyer niemeyer at conectiva.com
Thu Aug 5 23:53:31 CEST 2004
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Depends on in what direction you want to make a change. It appears you want to avoid introducing any kind of syntax change. In that case, you should explain people how to spell classmethod and synchronized in a more convenient way, because that is what the stated motivation of PEP 318 is - you would have to explain why this motive is bad, irrelevant, or otherwise not a worthy goal.
Or you could argue on a procedural basis: regardless of whether the feature is good or bad, the current implementation is unacceptable, as the PEP does not correspond with the implementation, the syntax is undocumented, the code has no test cases, and so on. I'm actually going to do that, because I do think the process is unacceptable, and should be either corrected or reversed (of course, this says nothing about the feature itself, or the code implementing it).
Ok, I'll try to summarize the current status of the feature so that I (and others) can understand if there's something to be done:
Decorators are going in on 2.4.
There are two obvious usage cases for decorators: static and class methods;
There are more complex usage cases for decorators such as PyObjC which was already agreed to be something necessarily supported in the implementation;
People which want the powerful decorators don't care about the syntax, as far as the feature is implemented;
Adapting external tools should not be used as an argument;
We're clearly unable to get into a consensus about syntax;
All current syntax vs. problems to solve have been discussed extensively;
There are bizarre usage cases of the current decorator implementation, but this is something which is considered abusive and won't affect decisions since should be casual;
The @ character is used in at least two tools (Leo, IPython), and this is being considered as something bad, but not a show stopper;
The perlish argument is non-sense;
I belive that either some different syntax which most people agree upon is raised, or we're done.
-- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]