[Python-Dev] PEP 318: Can't we all just get along?

[Paul McGuire]

"Andrew Durdin" <adurdin at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1928.1092895080.5135.python-list at python.org...
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:55:06 +1200, Greg Ewing
> <greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> > Guido:
> >
> > > Is anybody seriously trying to come up with a single alternative
> > > decorator proposal that most folks "out there" can support, to be
> > > presented to me (with implementation, please!) in time for 2.4b1?
> >
> > >From the posts I've seen here, the only alternatives that have
> > considerable popular support are ones that you've already rejected. So
> > I suspect nobody really feels it's worth trying.
>
> To expand on that just a bit: the two alternatives that were most
> generally favoured (in Doug Holton's estimate) were the
> "list-after-def" (C1 in the wiki), and the "pie decorator at top of
> function body" (E1 in the wiki), both of which Guido rejected.
> In the poll that Doug ran, E1 had a slight margin over C1:
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2004-August/233479.html
>
> However, C1 has an implementation, while E1 doesn't. (Aside: how
> difficult would it be to create an implementation of E1?)

There is an implementation of J2, to which I have converted from C1, given
GvR's predisposition for some sort of prefix form.  (J2 was not represented
in the poll.)  J2 uses a new keyword (decorate) to mark a block of 1 or more
decorator methods as a prefix to the "def fn(args):" line.  No offensive @,
and fairly pleasant to read!

-- Paul