On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 09:47, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> as [implementorOf(IFoo, forTypes=[Bar])]
> class FooToBarAdapter:
> ...
>
> and it could also be on the same line, e.g.:
>
> as [classmethod] def blah(cls):
> ...
>
> It reads a bit better with function definitions than with classes, but it's
> not too bad.
Agreed, I missed this one. It's not too bad with classes if you can
warp your mind to think of "to class" as a verb like "to define".
> It's more of a replacement for the *[decorators] syntax than
> the 'decorate:' syntax, but it's an English word rather than a symbol,
> which brings back a bit more of the "Python look and feel".
One minor nit, why use the brackets at all?
as sychronized, sharkfin(size=10) def VWBug(...):
that looks better to me than:
as [sychronized, sharkfin(size=10)] def VWBug(...):
without brackets it looks more to me like Python, you'd never see:
from foo import [bar, baz]
For longer lists of decorators use the familiar tuple rule, wrap in
parens:
as (sychronized,
sharkfin(size=10),
deprecated) def VWBug(...):
-Michel
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4