RetroSearch Browse

Wed Aug 11 23:09:46 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047652.html

Doug Holton wrote:

> After reading some posts here and the wiki page discussing the 
> decorators:  http://www.python.org/moin/PythonDecorators
> One idea that some people have suggested is to separate out standard 
> uses for decorators like function metadata, vs. built-in features of 
> python, like static methods and class methods.
> 
> So I'm suggesting, don't use decorators for static and class methods.
> 
> Perhaps for 2.5 or whenever, we should add keyword support for built-in 
> features, just like java:
> 
> These two keywords at least:
> 
> def static mymethod (arg1, arg2):
>     ....
> 
> def classmethod mymethod( cls, arg1, arg2 ):
>     ....
> 
> And then you have to decide if you want to support other java built-in 
> features and keywords like private, protected, public, synchronized.
> 

This is in no way meant to be taken personally, but I am going make the 
understated statement, "hell no", for this.  That means -Inf from me.  =)

We do not need more keywords for just static and class methods.  They 
don't get used enough to warrant that.

-Brett

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047652.html below:

add keywords for static and class methods only [related to decorators discussion]