RetroSearch Browse

Fri Aug 6 03:21:41 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047024.html

Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Or you could argue on a procedural basis: regardless of whether
> the feature is good or bad, the current implementation is
> unacceptable, as the PEP does not correspond with the
> implementation, the syntax is undocumented, the code has no test
> cases, and so on. I'm actually going to do that, because I do
> think the process is unacceptable, and should be either corrected
> or reversed (of course, this says nothing about the feature itself,
> or the code implementing it).

Note that @decorators are hardly unique in not having an up-to-date
PEP. Where it's different to the other cases is that they're rather
controversial, and therefore it's more obvious that there's a
problem.

-- 
Anthony Baxter     <anthony at interlink.com.au>
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047024.html below:

[Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators