> > The only real necessary restriction on the @ operator is that its > > argument be callable and take a single argument. Many expressions could > > return a callable object. Why not let them? Is it really worth having a > > special case just to SyntaxError expressions that sometimes won't result > > in an appropriate callable? > > > > Things someone might want to do, ordered roughly from most reasonable to > > least reasonable ;) > > @foo().bar() > > @foo or bar > > @mydecorators['foo'] > > @lambda f: foo(f) or bar(f) > > > > Why disallow these forms? It seems quite difficult, especially, to > > explain why the first one does not, or should not, work. > > > > James > > > > For what it's worth, I agree with James completely. > > Jp I concur. Raymond
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