On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 12:04, Bob Ippolito wrote: > On Mar 31, 2004, at 1:59 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote: > > >> Message: 1 > >> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 18:10:23 +0200 > >> From: Simon Percivall <s.percivall at chello.se> > >> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 318: Decorators last before colon > > > > I've been following this discussion closely and I would like to voice > > my > > opinion. > > > > Please don't add any decorator syntax to Python, at least not yet. All > > of the proposals I have seen so far are, to be blunt, and in my opinion > > of course, ugly and are getting uglier as the discussion ensues. > > > > I see nothing wrong, at least for the present, with the status quo > > decorators that follow a function or class definition. They are > > explicit, functionally equivalent, use the existing and completely > > understandable syntax, and are so rarely used by only the *most* > > experienced and advanced programmers that violating the beauty of the > > language is unjustified. > > I've been pretty quiet about this lately because the discussions have > gone into space, largely by people who don't even have a need or desire > for decorators, but uninformed comments like this just irk me. Well like the post says, it's just my opinion. > Decorators *are not rare* and are *used by regular programmers* in some > problem domains. Yes, it takes an advanced programmer to write such a > framework, but that doesn't mean that the syntax is useless to > non-advanced programmers. I didn't say useless, I said rarely used. I wouldn't imagine anyone here discussing syntax that was useless. > Please understand that just because you haven't need them yet doesn't > make them worthless, ugly, etc. I didn't say worthless either. > It has nothing to do with being an > experienced or advanced programmer, some problem domains simply REQUIRE > decorated functions in order to work at all. I disagree, but I agree that there exist problem domains for which decorators would make it *easier*. Are satisfying these problem domains worth new syntax? -Michel
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