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/047169.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: Call for defense of @decorators

[Python-Dev] Re: Call for defense of @decorators [Python-Dev] Re: Call for defense of @decoratorsTim Peters tim.peters at gmail.com
Fri Aug 6 19:21:42 CEST 2004
[Guido]
> A reference manual describes the status quo.  How can
> it possibly begin to describe future directions?  (Except when
> reserving certain classes of identifiers like C does.)

If it's a designer's intent that, say, the '#' character will never be
used by the language, then the reference manual can simply say that. 
In the absence of such explicit promises, it is indeed only describing
the current state of the language,

It's unreasonable to read the current Python ref as promising that @
(and ? and $) will never be used in any version of Python.  It's
understandable that people would bet on it, though, since that little
set of unused characters hasn't changed in Python's history.

If you want to say that Python will *never* use one (or more) of those
characters, it's easy to add such a promise.  If you don't want to
make such a promise, then it may be clearer (for non-lawyers) to say
that Python reserves @$?.
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