[Python-Dev] Possible rough edges in Python 3 metaclasses (was Re: Language reference updated for metaclasses)

[Ethan Furman]

Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:58 AM, PJ Eby wrote:
>> The reason for wanting this to be transparent is that 1) if you forget the
>> redundant class-decorator, mixin, or metaclass, stuff will silently not
>> work,
> 
> Why would it silently not work? What's preventing you from having
> decorators that create wrapped functions that fail noisily when
> called, then providing a class decorator that unwraps those functions,
> fixes them up with the class references they need and stores the
> unwrapped and updated versions back on the class.
> 
> You call it redundant, I call it explicit.
> 

The first time you specify something, it's explicit; if you have to 
specify the same thing a second time, it's redundant;  if this was a 
good thing why do we say DRY so often?

~Ethan~