"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/15/06, tomer filiba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i understand there's a green light for class decorators in py3k, > > so i wanted to give the issue a slight push. > FWIW, most of the arguments against PEP 359 were along the lines of, > "well you can do that with a metaclass already, so we don't really > need any new syntax", but you may be able to get around those > arguments because the decorator syntax already exists.
That's neither here nor there. Here's a post from Guido in response to Phillip and Greg in which he says more or less; someone write a PEP so that we can get them into 2.6 and Py3k... http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-March/062942.html The use-cases that Tomer brought up were also brought up in various posts within that same thread, and in the 3+ previous threads extending prior to March 2005 in the python-dev list (when I noticed that class decorators didn't make it into 2.4); namespaces, singletons, easy 'metaclass' chaining, whole class manipulations, properties, etc. The syntax already exists and I would imagine that there's a patch around somewhere. If Tomer (or someone else) writes a PEP, I don't see why (the previously overlooked) class decorators shouldn't make it into 2.6 and 3.0 . - Josiah _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
