RetroSearch Browse

Mon Aug 2 22:07:29 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046653.html

Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> writes:

>> >>I would think the fact that the '[decorators]' syntax can be implemented 
>> >>in pure Python (no changes to the interpreter) for existing Python 
>> >>versions would give more weight to it.
>
> Can it?  I must've missed that.  It sure sounds like an incredible
> hack -- how to you prevent the default behavior that the list of
> decorators is thrown away by the interpreter?

See http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.devel/60542

I'm really surprised you missed it, and was likewise disappointed
that it wasn't included in the weekly (?) summary.  It seemed like a
pretty significant development to me.

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

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046653.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: 2.4a2, and @decorators