python-dev Summary for 2004-08-01 through 2004-08-15

[Brett C.]

[SNIP - me going on about how I had wished Guido just pronounced on
decorators and moved on]
> "Well, then allow me to retort."
> 
> Up until PyCon in June, Guido was publicly leaning toward a C1-flavor of
> decorator syntax.  Apparently, there was sufficient furor by some audience
> members (not to quibble whether or not this group was in fact representative
> of all Python users) that Guido dropped back from it.  Sometime in June,
> @decorator seemed to drop from the sky - it was not even one of the top 2
> that GvR had in his keynote presentation - and by late July, it was suddenly
> to be found in the newly released 2.4a2.
> 

The '@' syntax had pretty much been discussed the whole time.  At the
end of PyCON Guido had a chance to talk to some other developers
toward the end of the conference that started to change his opinion. 
After the conference he stated that he was starting to strongly
consider the '@' syntax, and this was all public.

He then went to EuroPython.  Audience was much more perceptive to '@'
than other syntaxes.  Some more contemplation on Guido's part, and
that led to the '@' syntax.

But even had there not been any public discussion on Guido's part, I
still think it is fine that Guido didn't have a huge discussion before
making his final decision.  This is Guido's language and we all just
happen to love it.


> I guess my sin of omission was in not following python-dev directly, but
> instead relying on the natural checks and balances that have produced the
> beautiful Python language thus far.

And the final check is Guido.  =)

>  Despite the periodic reporting of
> python-dev summaries (thank you! BTW),

Welcome.

> and the April and June summaries of
> the decorator status, *not one* of these summaries announced the selection
> of "@decorator" before it was checked in and released - making it a seeming
> fait accompli.

No report because I didn't officially know until people started to
scream about it (I check my python-dev mail before python-checkins so
I didn't even see the checkin before the flood of mail started).

>  Contrast with the announcement of 'Generator expressions are
> in!' in your May summary, well in advance of the 2.4a release.
> 

That's just because it was all resolved way back when.  Had decorators
been resolved earlier it also would have gotten mentioned earlier.

People need to realize this is all alpha software, not beta. 
Everything can change and python-dev reserves the right to tweak stuff
up to b1.

> > At this point people should be hashing out which syntax alternative they
> > want to present to Guido on comp.lang.python_.  No more talking on
> > python-dev, no more syntax proposals.  The community should set a goal
> > date (Sept. 1 seems good) and just choose a bloody alternative.  Then
> > when Guido makes his choice people accept it or just go to another
> > language.  No one had better voice their disappoint once Guido chooses
> > his syntax or I will personally come beat you over with a stick for
> > being a whiner.
> >
> 
> Um, where have you been?

Sitting in my chair reading a lot of email.

>  It seemed to me that, instead of continued
> wallowing in a chaos of syntax discussions, that we collectively *were*
> working on "just choosing a bloody alternative."

Not how it looked on python-dev.  Story may have been that on c.l.py,
but on my side it was a ton of back and forth and people proposing
random syntaxes whenever an idea popped in their head.

>  I guess we've not been
> wholly successful, as there are still *two* popular contenders, but one is
> leading the other by more than 2-to-1, and a consensus measure shows an even
> greater level of, if not acceptance, at least tolerance.  c.l.py is a tough
> herd of cats!  Michael Sparks and Robert Brewer have voted in a measure
> beyond simply posting Usenet votes, and have completed the steps for one of
> the contenders to be considered by Guido.  The absence of champions for the
> other option may end up making the decision by default - too bad, actually.
> 

And that's great.  As I said, this was not reflected on python-dev *at
all*.  Robert sent an email today stating that he had a whole paper on
the syntax he was supporting.  He seems to be going about it the right
way and honestly I hope his wins just for the fact that he has put the
effort in.


> > OK, that's out of my system.  I feel better now.
> >
> 
> Well, good for you.  I also subscribe to a "no whining" philosophy, but I
> don't think it is unexpected nor unreasonable that the rapid selection,
> implementation, and release of "@decorator" took many by (unpleasant)
> surprise.
>  And am I the only one who has trouble reconciling your tirade
> with your encouragement to "take a stance" (in the emphasized section at
> top)?
> 

Maybe.  =)

The tirade was not on taking a stand.  It was at everybody fighting
this out on python-dev even after Guido told people to go off and
agree on a single syntax.  python-dev is not the place to have the
whole community duke it out over an alternative syntax.  *That* was
what the tirade was about.

> We can agree to disagree - I'll plead guilty to being a miserable lurker who
> up until recently was happy to rely on the wisdom of strangers - but allow
> me to take at least a little umbrage at your tirade.
> 

Sure, but I think you mistook me.  But even if you didn't, no problem.

-Brett