A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046886.html below:

[Python-Dev] Plea for simpler decorator syntax, in addition to pie-shaped syntax

[Python-Dev] Plea for simpler decorator syntax, in addition to pie-shaped syntaxGustavo Niemeyer niemeyer at conectiva.com
Thu Aug 5 19:46:19 CEST 2004
> IMO, the most common uses of decorators will be to define properties,
> and class and static methods.  IMO, these uses would be better served
> by a simpler syntax:
> 
>   def classmethod foo(cls, ...):
>       ...
> 
> This simplified syntax only allows names to specify decorators.  It
> could allow multiple names, although I'm not sure it should,
> 
> I find this *far* more readable and obvious than any of the other syntaxs
> I've seen propsed.

Agreed.

> Those applications that *need* decorator arguments could use the more
> complex pie-shaped notation.

I wouldn't care to define a decorator function to introduce arguments,
and force every decorator function to take a single argument.

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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