Confused about pep 318

[Christopher T King]

On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Anthony Baxter wrote:

> > That thread reaches no consensus, other than, in his sole post in the
> > thread, Guido stating "I would love to see an implementation of this
> > idea."  Nothing about "this is going to be in 2.4a2, anybody vehemently
> > opposed to it?"  Like I said, the go-ahead was given privately.
> 
> None of the decorator discussions _ever_ reached a conclusion. As mwh put it,
> "bike-shed-the-ultimate". At the end of the day, Guido's the one who makes
> these decisions. His decision was that the @ syntax should go into 2.4a2.

I can't speak for everybody, but I would've liked some closure on the 
issue before it was injected into 2.4a2.  From what I can tell, in the 
public's mind, the syntax of decorators was still an open issue, and if 
anything was going to make it in, it was going to be the "def foo() 
[dec]:" syntax that was currently in favour.  No-one was prepared for the 
introduction of the @ syntax.