[Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
Edward K. Ream
edreamleo at charter.net
Fri Aug 6 00:19:29 CEST 2004
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Fri Aug 6 00:19:29 CEST 2004
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Or you could argue on a procedural basis: regardless of whether > the feature is good or bad, the current implementation is > unacceptable, as the PEP does not correspond with the > implementation, the syntax is undocumented, the code has no test > cases, and so on. I'm actually going to do that, because I do > think the process is unacceptable, and should be either corrected > or reversed (of course, this says nothing about the feature itself, > or the code implementing it). Thank you, Martin. I think Python will be the better for holding itself to higher standards. Edward -------------------------------------------------------------------- Edward K. Ream email: edreamleo at charter.net Leo: Literate Editor with Outlines Leo: http://webpages.charter.net/edreamleo/front.html --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: Re: Call for defense of @decorators
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Call for defense of @decorators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list