RetroSearch Browse

Thu Feb 26 05:31:51 EST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-February/042748.html

Shalabh Chaturvedi wrote:
> ...
> 
> sync = synchronized(lock)
> def sync classmethod func(a):
 >
 > In fact sync would probably be reused throughout
 > the class body.

In this case yes. But there are other usecases where it isn't as hot 
(pseudo Spark):

grammar_rule = grammar("x := y z?")
def grammar_rule func1(a):
	pass

grammar_rule = grammar("y := y1 y2?")
def grammar_rule func2(a):
	pass

grammar_rule = grammar("z := z2? z1")
def grammar_rule func3(a):
	pass

But it isn't terrible. It just means you need to create meaningless 
temporaries. It also makes life a little harder for tools trying to read 
the code and figure out what is going on. This is an easy pattern to 
look for:

def sync func(a)[synchronized(lock)]:

For instance an IDE could make a tooltip wherever "func" is used to 
indicate that it is synchronized with a particular lock. That gets much 
harder if there are usually arbitrary amounts of Turing complete code 
between the function declaration and the decorator declaration.

Another concern: It arguably HURTS readability if deciphering a function 
declaration requires scanning backwards looking for definitions like the 
one for "sync".

I certainly see the strength of your proposal from a readability point 
of view.

  Paul Prescod

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-February/042748.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: new syntax for wrapping (PEP 318)