[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 318: Decorators last before colon (original) (raw)

Bob Ippolito bob at redivi.com
Thu Apr 1 09:53:20 EST 2004

On Apr 1, 2004, at 3:10 AM, Holger Krekel wrote:

Bob Ippolito wrote:

On Mar 31, 2004, at 3:37 PM, Holger Krekel wrote:

Specifically, in PyPy we use something like

def addListList(self, wlist1, wlist2): ... def addIntInt(self, wlist1, wlist2): ... and later on just one: registerall(vars(), WListType) (which will register the methods to some multimethod dispatcher). It's a matter of taste i guess if using decorators - whatever syntax - at each function definition would be more readable. Would you have even considered writing something as crazy as the aforementioned example if decorators were already in Python? I doubt it. Yes, we might have have used some decorator syntax. But then again, we also might use full Macros if they were available. The question (to me) is if there are enough use cases to warrant a new special decorator syntax.

Well, I would be happy with full macros too.. but I'm not crazy enough to propose adding them :)

At least consider that Python's battery library only has ~10 occurences of 'classmethod' and no 'staticmethod' at all.

That's a bogus argument, using decorators is currently such a PITA that people avoid them, and not much of the standard library was written after the release of 2.2.

And let me add that IMO decorators generally make things harder to read because you have to wonder what magic takes place in those decorators. IOW, i am not sure that seeing decorators occurring everywhere (because they become so convenient to write) will improve readability and debuggability of a python program.

It's not really about readability and debuggability, this is a case where the information is absolutely necessary for the program to work at all.. the information needs to be there, right up against that def, or else it's not readable and hard to debug. Putting it in a doc string and having a metaclass understand how to parse it is not more readable and is harder to debug.

for example you could try to use the first line of the docstring for it - maybe building on the typical way to document C-defined python functions. e.g.:

"(sometypesignature) -> (somereturntype)" I am not saying straight away this is better but i doubt that the only good solution to the above problem is to add new syntax. Mangling doc strings is really stupid and is not even an option, IMHO. The only reason people do this is because we don't have a decorator syntax. Well, the above is (supposed to be) used for documenting the signature of C-functions. Read "Documentation strings" in

I am not talking about documentation! This is code! It tells the bridge how to mangle the input and output of the method when it is crossing the Objective C <-> Python bridge! Without these selectors, the code does not work at all, because it needs to convert objects into C types (int, float, struct, etc.) and vice versa in many cases.. sometimes even worse (pointers, yay!).

-bob

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list