Jp Calderone wrote:
> Here's a brief test for a syntax-change-less implementation of this
> feature, not as complete as test_decorators, but a good start, I believe:
[...]
> from 2.4a2. I hope that something along the lines of the above will be
> considered, instead, for the next alpha, unless there is widespread
> community support for '@decorator', as opposed to the ridiculously faint
> support ("it's better than nothing") currently behind it.
FWIW, I'd be very much +1 on something like this, which feels much more
'pythonic' and elegant to me than the @ syntax. I know I'm biased because the
@ syntax will force me to change ipython and it will break current ipython for
anyone wanting to use 2.4, but I'm honestly trying to assess it beyond ipython.
And I still don't like it, while JP's solution seems nice and clean to me.
Cheers,
f
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