[Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators (original) (raw)

Barry Warsaw barry at python.org
Thu Aug 5 23:19:53 CEST 2004

On Thu, 2004-08-05 at 17:07, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:

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).

Martin makes a good point. Guido could threaten to remove the feature by beta 1 (and thus for 2.4 final) if the PEP is not brought up to date.

not-that-i'm-volunteering-'cause-i'd-rather-see-it-done-ly y'rs, -Barry

-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20040805/e8230d4a/attachment.pgp

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list