[Python-Dev] Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators (original) (raw)
Walter Dörwald walter at livinglogic.de
Tue Aug 10 15:28:23 CEST 2004
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Skip Montanaro wrote:
Walter> So how about:
Walter> make classmethod Walter> def foo(cls, bar): Walter> ... I don't think anybody's come up with a candidate keyword that reads well in most/all situations. Consider: make accepts(int, (int, float)) make returns(int) def foo(arg1, arg2): return arg1 * arg2 While you can contort "make" to mean what you want in this case it's clearly a much different meaning ("ensure that (or force) this function to accept and return these types) than "make classmethod" ("turn this function into a class method"). Other potential keywords have similar problems.
If you know what the keyword is, you can rename the decorator accordingly:
make argcheck(int, (int, float))
make returncheck(int)
But we could choose a keyword that doesn't mean anything, e.g. 'dec' or 'decorate'.
Bye, Walter Dörwald
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]