RetroSearch Browse

Fri Feb 27 16:57:19 EST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-February/042837.html

Michael Chermside <mcherm at mcherm.com> writes:

>       I think that two objections still stand:
>
>       * "def foo (bar,baz) [qux, quux]:" is certainly not "executable
>         pseudocode".

This has been mentioned a couple of times. I'm not sure I see the
issue, though. With concrete examples, it *does* read like executable
pseudocode to me:

    def factory(cls, arg1, arg2) [classmethod]:
        ...

reads to me as "define a factory function, with arguments cls, arg1,
arg2 - it's a class method".

    def tidy_up() [onexit]:

reads as "define the tidy_up function which is called on exit from the
program".

Getting the decorator names right is the key thing, I think.

Paul.
-- 
This signature intentionally left blank

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-February/042837.html below:

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