On Mar 28, 2004, at 9:45 AM, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > At 12:54 PM 3/28/04 +0100, Paul Moore wrote: >> Robert Mollitor <mollitor at earthlink.net> writes: >> >> > It would be nice if transformer decorations were never allowed >> > "arguments". It would keep that list as short >> > and as tidy as possible. >> >> That's the sort of restriction I imagined that Guido was tending >> towards. While it's justifiable in this context, I would prefer to >> leave the option of using arguments available, in case someone comes >> up with a use where function attributes are inappropriate. > > It's inappropriate to use attributes of a function for attributes that > logically belong to the decorator. For example > 'synchronized(lockattr="baz")'. The 'lockattr' logically belongs to > the synchronizing decoration. Declaring it in a separate location > makes the whole thing harder to read/understand. Not to mention the fact that you'll have to start prefixing your function attributes so that you don't clash between decorators.. because of the flat namespace. -bob -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2357 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20040328/80551618/smime-0001.bin
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