On Saturday, January 24, 2015 at 7:30:02 AM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > [...] It requires extra complexity to the parser, so that > decorators may be separated from the function by a hint: > > @decorate > "@typehint: (str, int) -> bool" > def myfunction(arg1, arg2): > > No doubt some people will get them the wrong way around, > and the type checker may silently ignore their hints: > > "@typehint: (str, int) -> bool" > @decorate > def myfunction(arg1, arg2): > > And others will write: > > @decorate > @typehint(str, int) -> bool > def myfunction(arg1, arg2): > > > and be annoyed or perplexed by the syntax error. > > Some syntax will be a bug magnet. This is one.
Your argument is weak here. If the interpreter cannot distinguish between "@typehint ..." and "@ ..." then those who defined the logic need to go back to CS-101. Secondly, why set *ANY* rules as to the order of typehints -vs- decorators? Who cares about the "syntactical order", when they can be parsed and then applied in *ANY* order. Syntactical order need not *ALWAYS* be significant. In fact, in this case, syntactic ordering rules are superfluously onerous on the human. And that is how you kill two birds with one stone. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
