[Python-Dev] Re: Another approach to decorators. (original) (raw)

David Abrahams dave at boost-consulting.com
Thu Aug 12 00:38:12 CEST 2004

Michel Pelletier <michel at dialnetwork.com> writes:

From: Martin Zarate <mzarate at uoguelph.ca>

I submit that the most Python solution, that would also be legible (but not necessarily very pretty) would be to actually make the decorator a bona-fide block that you nest your class or function into.

remake functor(foo, bar), staticmethod: def baz(): pass This concretely shows the relationship of the original define statement to its wrapper objects. The principle is simple - the remake block will close with only one object in its immediate namespace I like your idea a lot, buy why just one? Your scheme of making decorators a block could be applied to several methods in a class: class Foo: decorate static: def static1(blah...): pass def static2(blah...): pass To me, this idea looks more like Python than all the rest, and allows you to consolidate related decorated methods and classes. Nest them to apply decorators "aquisition style": class Foo: decorate static: def static1(blah...): pass decorate locksFile: def static2andLocks(blah...): # both decorators appy pass

Wow, Martin Z's idea (using your keyword) really went "thunk" for me. What decorate does would be very much like what "class" does in some ways.

I wonder if there's a way, using metaclasses, to get this syntax today:

class Foo:

  class d1(static):
    def static1(blah):
      pass

    class d2(locksFile):
      def static2andLocks(blah): # both apply
        pass

for suitably defined "static" and "locksFile" classes?

It's not beautiful, but it would be a good proof of the generality/implementability of the decorator->class mapping.

-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list