Possible PEP: Improve classmethod/staticmethod syntax
Sean Ross
frobozz_electric at hotmail.com
Thu Jun 5 11:59:32 EDT 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Thu Jun 5 11:59:32 EDT 2003
- Previous message (by thread): Possible PEP: Improve classmethod/staticmethod syntax
- Next message (by thread): Possible PEP: Improve classmethod/staticmethod syntax
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
"Kevin Smith" <Kevin.Smith at sas.com> wrote in message news:20030605080122580-0400 at braeburn.themorgue.org... > In <bbl189$fs9$1 at driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca> Sean Ross wrote: > > Personally, I would like to see something like this: > > > > def ManyFunctionAttributes() as static, contract(pre,post): > > ... > > I'd go for this one. There is just something unpalatable about the 'def > foo()[static]' syntax. That's just too much unnecessary and bizarre > syntax for Python. But this 'as <tuple>' syntax seems to fit quite > nicely. > I agree with the 'unpalatable' reaction to 'def foo()[static]'. To me, it introduces unnecessary line noise. I should note that using the 'as <tuple>' form was suggested on python-dev, back in February, by (I think) Greg Ewing. (That was a very long thread.) As for my class method suggestion: def MyClass.foo(): ... that's stolen from Ruby. Although, I think I might still prefer def foo() as classmethod: ... (I imagine 'def foo() as class: ... ' could be misconstrued...) Anyway, an interesting discussion. And, if you're interested in this topic, check out the discussion from python-dev in February. You'll probably also find the 'thunks' discussion interesting.
- Previous message (by thread): Possible PEP: Improve classmethod/staticmethod syntax
- Next message (by thread): Possible PEP: Improve classmethod/staticmethod syntax
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list