"Chaz." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is that what adding some typing to the system will do?
Not necessarily, but this particular instance isn't necessarily a typing-system issue. All sane or insane implementations of the @throws decorator that I can think of (annotation, exception translation, unittest, etc.) offer no improvement to the language that would warrant the necessity of a "throws" syntax to replace the @throws decorator. Remember, not all X line functions should become builtins or syntax. - Josiah > Josiah Carlson wrote: > > "Chaz." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or > >> whatever you might call it). > >> > >> Right now I do something like: > >> > >> @throws(IOError) > >> def foo(...) : > > ... > >> I might suggest > >> > >> def foo(...) throws(...) : > >> > >> as a more integrated approach. > > > > You are just relocating decorators. Stop. > > > > > > - Josiah > > > > _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
