>> There is no practical use for decorators IMHO > It's true that decorators are syntactic sugar and don't add any new > functional capabilities to the language.
Which is all I intended to imply. > However this doesn't mean that there is no practical use for decorators. Nor did I mean that, after all I am a big advocate of lambdas and they too are sugar. They have no practical use but are nice for conveying certain concepts in code. Similarly with decorators (although I do hate the syntax!) > After all, list comprehension is mostly syntactic sugar too! Absolutely and also add no practical functionality they are just shorthand, albeit with a small performance advantage in many cases - which is not true of decorators or lambdas! > proposal for dynamic function overloading: > http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=155514 I really don't like this proposal nor many of the others that currently exist to seemingly turn Python into Java and C++! If people want to code in the Java porridge let them use Java not try to turn Python into the same sludge. (And yes, I do realise that it's Guido who's doing the work in this case! :-) Alan G. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
