RetroSearch Browse

Sat Aug 7 10:42:16 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047248.html

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 11:39:34 -0400, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

> So I spent a little time futzing with python-mode and some of my
> decorator code, to try some alternative leading characters.  Of the ones
> that cannot be used in valid Python code today (i.e. no backward
> compatibility issues), I tried ':', '/', '=', '*', and '|'.
>
> [snipped]
>
> My preference then would be to use = with | and : as alternatives, in
> that order.

Does it really need to be only one character? Would this make the parser  
to complicated? If not, I would propose '::' which stands out much more  
than ':'

What about '~'?

More:
  '|='
  '|~'
  ':~'
  ':=' - This was brought up as late binding as well:
    name := staticmethod(name)
    def name(self):
        ...
  '&' - Used for too much else IMO.

Now in context:

   ::accepts(int,int)
   ::returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

   |=accepts(int,int)
   |=returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

   |~accepts(int,int)
   |~returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

   :~accepts(int,int)
   :~returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

   :=accepts(int,int)
   :=returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

   ~accepts(int,int)
   ~returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

   ~~accepts(int,int)
   ~~returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

If all this is not possible, then I +1 for '|'.
   |accepts(int,int)
   |returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

Regards,
Florian Schulze
ps: Just for reference:

   @accepts(int,int)
   @returns(float)
   def bar(low,high):
       ...

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047248.html below:

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