[Python-Dev] PEP 318: Can't we all just get along? (original) (raw)
Kevin Smith Kevin.Smith at theMorgue.org
Wed Aug 18 22:24:13 CEST 2004
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 318: Can't we all just get along?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 318: Can't we all just get along?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Aug 18, 2004, at 4:07 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Kevin Smith wrote:
def classmethod foo(x, y, z): pass That's it. Indeed, that is form F (5.13) in http://www.python.org/moin/PythonDecorators So this proposal is not new, and has the advantages and disadvantages listed in the Wiki. The main reason to reject it (AFAICT) is the similarity to monstrosities such as "public final synchronized void foo()".
Yes, I realize that this syntax isn't new (I believe that it was even used in an example in my original PEP). I hadn't actually read Wiki before, but the only minus that I really see for this syntax is that you can't have arguments to the decorators. I guess I just find the "public final synchronized void foo()" less monstrous than
@public @final @synchronized @void def foo()
Kevin Smith Kevin.Smith at sas.com
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 318: Can't we all just get along?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 318: Can't we all just get along?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]