Maybe, just maybe @decorator syntax is ok after all

[Ville Vainio]

It might just be that @decorator might not be all that bad. When you
look at code that uses it it's not that ugly after all.

A lot of the furor about this is probably because it happened so
quicly. The situation might have been different if we had seen a
pronouncement a week before, in the vein of "I have chosen this syntax
- it will go in to the next alpha".

My chief worry was throwing away one of the few unused ascii symbols,
but if we take a look at perl6, there is a lot of promising unicode
symbols to choose from in the future ;-). Also, there is still @(),
@#, @{} and others in the hypothetical event BDFL would like to use @
for future features like macros, ruby blocks or whatever.

So I would vote +0 for @decorator if we were in the parallel universe
where that mattered. Two days ago I was -10.

-- 
Ville Vainio   http://tinyurl.com/2prnb