[Python-3000] defop ?

[Paul Moore]

On 11/23/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On 11/22/06, Calvin Spealman <ironfroggy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This whole thing seems a bit off from start to finish. A seperate
> > definition syntax with a special name/expression weirdo thingy, etc.
>
> I have the same gut feelings but find it hard to explain why.
>
> But I've learned to trust my gut -- eventually it will come to me.

I agree entirely. The whole defop thing seems odd (and I *hate* the
name "defop"). I fail to see what it gains over a decorator syntax
such as is already available in the 3 generic function packages
available (RuleDispatch/PEAK.Rules, simplegeneric, and Guido's version
in the sandbox).

Without defop, the proposal seems to boil down to sanctioning a
standard library addition which provides a generic function package -
*possibly* with some modification of existing standard library and
builtin functions to become generics.

I'm sure I'm missing something, because the proposal feels alternately
overcomplex and trivial to me...

Paul.