> ... The * prefix looks so arbitrary: why not /, why not @, etc... It's curious that '@' was brought. I bet it won't be included in the proposal but it should be mentioned that there's a notorious corner use case using a symetrical syntax with a prefix-postfix pair of characters. With proper semantics and honoring lowercase plus underscore name style, it may look like this: o_o = [wow, it, reminds, me, ol, uncle, Pep] class Giuseppe(object): @[o_o]@ def pepper_peps_up_the_pep_thread(self): pass # heh... where's the "pess" reserved werd? (BIG :-D if it wasn't clear enough) Now seriously... Don't know if it was mentioned before or even if it's relevant but I strongly believe that most .NET programmers will understand its meaning (even no-C# ones) and also java ones will (they might not reckon it though ;-) yet still considering the fact that python's decorators will be more powerful. FWIW: For reasons already given in previous messages I *do* prefer decorator-before-def-plus-star syntax (prefix only ;-) Regards, -Hernan do i send this or not? yes, no, yes, no, yes...
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