Maybe, just maybe @decorator syntax is ok after all

[Bengt Richter]

On 10 Aug 2004 03:18:54 -0700, artur_spruce at yahoo.com (AdSR) wrote:

>bokr at oz.net (Bengt Richter) wrote in message news:<cf87jt$bra$0$216.39.172.122 at theriver.com>...
>> On 9 Aug 2004 07:07:54 -0700, artur_spruce at yahoo.com (AdSR) wrote:
>> <snip>
>> >So the order is reverse, which breaks my previous interpretation. Oh, well...
>> >
>> I think your example is not from the PEP. What "spec" are you citing?
>
>http://www.python.org/dev/doc/devel/ref/function.html

I guess that should be fixed. IIUC. Per BDFL:

    http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047521.html

I still think a di-glyph with an opening paren would give the feel of
the nesting effect (inner before outer) better than @ -- e.g.,

    decofunexpr1(=
    decofunexpr2(=
    def foo(): pass

for effect foo = decofunexpr1(decofunexpr2(foo))

(I started with '(:' but tools are sensitive to ':' I guess, so above uses '(='

Regards,
Bengt Richter