On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 01:36:19 -0400, Jp Calderone <exarkun at divmod.com> wrote:
[JP provides a partial implementation of a variant decorator approach]
> I realize there is little or no chance of '@decorator' being pulled
> 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.
I'm not sure how to take your post. In particular, I don't see the
implementation as the limiting factor in decorator design. We can
probably implement any design that we want to. The question is
actually about the preferred design. You seem to be suggesting a
design where decorate() is used as a pseudo-keyword; assuming, for
example, that you'd want it to work for functions as well as methods.
I suspect it's futile to propose alternate designs at this point.
Jeremy
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