[Python-Dev] Re: method decorators (PEP 318)

[Skip Montanaro]

    Robert> My point here is we may want to aim for making the information
    Robert> kept on the function object itself as rich as possible and make
    Robert> the "decorations" do the work of pulling information from
    Robert> whatever the function "publishes".

You can do that with just the decorator syntax:

    def attrs(**kwds):
        def set_attributes(f):
            for k in kwds:
                setattr(f, k, kwds[k])
            return f
        return set_attributes

    def func(arg1, arg2) [attrs(accepts=(int, (int,float)),
                                returns=((int,float))),
                          check_types]:
        pass

    Robert> ... there is a trivial workaround if we restrict the transformer
    Robert> list to identifiers:

    Robert> sync = synchronized(lockattr="baz")
    Robert> def func [sync] (arg1, arg2):
    Robert>     pass

I think restricting decorators to only be identifiers would be shortsighted.
I can understand having to create workarounds for unforseen situations, but
it's clear at this point in the discussion that decorator functions might
need to accept parameters.  Why not let them?

Skip