RetroSearch Browse

Thu Aug 5 21:45:42 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046916.html

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:39:56 -0400, Nicolas Fleury <nidoizo at yahoo.com> wrote:
> IxokaI wrote:
> > I added "with", although I havn't seen it. "using" would work too. I
> > personally do not like punctuation syntax-- I'd really like to see
> > something english, even with the hated addition of a keyword. I
> > understand Guido's disapproval for "as" so wanted to think of an
> > alternate.
> 
> Is there ambiguities with the following? (I don't want to propose them,
> but I would like to at least add them to Wiki, even to specify why they
> don't work or why we hate them):
> 
> def decorator1(decoratorN(foo))(arg1, argN): pass
> def decorator1(decoratorN(foo(arg1, argN))): pass
> def(decorator1, decoratorN) foo(arg1, argN): pass
> 

  Ack. I'd *never* use those syntaxes :) They are not ambigious, but
just... complicated. The function name is too hidden, and really, that
is in most cases the most important piece of information on that line.

> And is the [decorator] list syntax before or after the "def"?

  Sorry, i was refeering to the C# like before. I'll fix.

--Stephen

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046916.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: @decorators, the PEP and the "options" out there?