"gasolin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My thought is that since we use all decorators to handle something, "@" > is a decorator sign to notice us that fact. It's no need to tell > ourself again that "the decorator is used to handle something"
But I can have decorators for behavior besides handling things. Even multiple decorators can be used. Anyway, if it doesn't break existing code and provides a smooth migration path, I have nothing against any of these syntaxes. -- Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
