RetroSearch Browse

Thu Apr 1 17:25:20 EST 2004 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-April/043923.html

Jeremy Hylton <jeremy at alum.mit.edu> writes:

> On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 07:13, Michael Hudson wrote:
>> > I don't think Michel is saying they are worthless.  However, the
>> > proposed syntax is highly contentious.  It would be good if there
>> > was a short term solution that wouldn't require new syntax.  That
>> > would give Guido and the Python community time to figure out the
>> > best syntax.
>> 
>> We've been discussing this off and on for OVER A YEAR!  If 'the best
>> syntax' hasn't been figured out yet after N thousand emails on the
>> subject, I see no reason to believe enlightenment is going to arrive
>> soon (or ever).
>
> There's no particular reason to believe that effort alone will arrive at
> an elegant solution.  On the other hand, maybe there isn't a good syntax
> for arbitrary decorators.

Has something along these lines been discussed?

  with [staticmethod, classmethod]:

     def foo(x):
         pass

     def bar(x):
         pass

IIUC, the PyObjC application needs whole swathes of functions with
the same decoration, but this syntax isn't much worse for one
function than for many.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-April/043923.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 318: Decorators last before colon