[Python-Dev] Re: new syntax for wrapping (PEP 318) (original) (raw)
Paul Moore pf_moore at yahoo.co.uk
Fri Feb 27 16:57:19 EST 2004
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: new syntax for wrapping (PEP 318)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] OpenVMS file system and UNIVERSAL_NEWLINES support
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael Chermside <mcherm at mcherm.com> writes:
I think that two objections still stand:
* "def foo (bar,baz) [qux, quux]:" is certainly not "executable pseudocode".
This has been mentioned a couple of times. I'm not sure I see the issue, though. With concrete examples, it does read like executable pseudocode to me:
def factory(cls, arg1, arg2) [classmethod]:
...
reads to me as "define a factory function, with arguments cls, arg1, arg2 - it's a class method".
def tidy_up() [onexit]:
reads as "define the tidy_up function which is called on exit from the program".
Getting the decorator names right is the key thing, I think.
Paul.
This signature intentionally left blank
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: new syntax for wrapping (PEP 318)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] OpenVMS file system and UNIVERSAL_NEWLINES support
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]