Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Mon Mar 31 16:15:16 EDT 2014

• Previous message (by thread): unicode as valid naming symbols
• Next message (by thread): unicode as valid naming symbols
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On 3/31/2014 3:31 PM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 31-03-14 19:40, Ian Kelly schreef:

>> First, because while those may degrade readability, they do
>> so in a constrained way.  A decorator application is just the @ symbol
>> and an identifier.
>
> And if abused, can totally change the working of your function. There
> is no guarantee that the function returned, has any relation with the
> original function. If that can't be a night mare for readability,
> I don't know what is.

This is a matter of the wrapping function, not the decorator syntax 
abbreviation.

@twist_the_function_meaning
def f: return clear_expression

is no worse in this regard than the written out form

def f: return clear_expression
f = twist_the_function_meaning(f)

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

---

• Previous message (by thread): unicode as valid naming symbols
• Next message (by thread): unicode as valid naming symbols
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-list mailing list