From 753c085617cbac33baf789bbdf04717b43f02443 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Goodger Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:40:12 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] whitespace --- pep-0318.txt | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) diff --git a/pep-0318.txt b/pep-0318.txt index f9867dc3f..4d5796f90 100644 --- a/pep-0318.txt +++ b/pep-0318.txt @@ -9,16 +9,16 @@ Content-Type: text/x-rst Created: 05-Jun-2003 Python-Version: 2.4 Post-History: 09-Jun-2003, 10-Jun-2003, 27-Feb-2004, 23-Mar-2004, 30-Aug-2004, -2-Sep-2004 + 2-Sep-2004 WarningWarningWarning ===================== This document is meant to describe the decorator syntax and the -process that resulted in the decisions that were made. It does not -attempt to cover the huge number of potential alternative syntaxes, -nor is it an attempt to exhaustively list all the positives and +process that resulted in the decisions that were made. It does not +attempt to cover the huge number of potential alternative syntaxes, +nor is it an attempt to exhaustively list all the positives and negatives of each form. @@ -144,12 +144,12 @@ The discussion continued on and off on python-dev from February 2002 through July 2004. Hundreds and hundreds of posts were made, with people proposing many possible syntax variations. Guido took a list of proposals to `EuroPython 2004`_, where a discussion took -place. Subsequent to this, he decided that we'd have the `Java-style`_ -@decorator syntax, and this appeared for the first time in 2.4a2. -Barry Warsaw named this the 'pie-decorator' syntax, in honor of the -Pie-thon Parrot shootout which was occured around the same time as -the decorator syntax, and because the @ looks a little like a pie. -Guido `outlined his case`_ on Python-dev, including `this piece`_ +place. Subsequent to this, he decided that we'd have the `Java-style`_ +@decorator syntax, and this appeared for the first time in 2.4a2. +Barry Warsaw named this the 'pie-decorator' syntax, in honor of the +Pie-thon Parrot shootout which was occured around the same time as +the decorator syntax, and because the @ looks a little like a pie. +Guido `outlined his case`_ on Python-dev, including `this piece`_ on some of the (many) rejected forms. .. _EuroPython 2004: @@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ syntax used in 2.4a2:: There have been a number of objections raised to this location -- the primary one is that it's the first real Python case where a line of code -has an effect on a following line. The syntax available in 2.4a3 +has an effect on a following line. The syntax available in 2.4a3 requires one decorator per line (in a2, multiple decorators could be specified on the same line). @@ -446,9 +446,9 @@ Syntax forms def foo(arg1,arg2): pass - [accepts(int,int), returns(float)] - def bar(low,high): - pass + [accepts(int,int), returns(float)] + def bar(low,high): + pass The major objection to the list syntax is that it's currently meaningful (when used in the form before the method). It's also @@ -461,8 +461,8 @@ Syntax forms pass - def bar(low,high): - pass + def bar(low,high): + pass None of these alternatives gained much traction. The alternatives which involve square brackets only serve to make it obvious that the @@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ Syntax forms .. _the full response: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-September/048518.html -* Other forms +* Other forms There are plenty of other variants and proposals on `the wiki page`_. @@ -573,7 +573,7 @@ Current Implementation, History =============================== Guido asked for a volunteer to implement his preferred syntax, and Mark -Russell stepped up and posted a `patch`_ to SF. This new syntax was +Russell stepped up and posted a `patch`_ to SF. This new syntax was available in 2.4a2. :: @dec2 @@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ Sparks produced `a patch`_. .. _detailed proposal: http://www.aminus.org/rbre/python/pydec.html -.. _a patch: +.. _a patch: http://www.python.org/sf/1013835 As noted previously, Guido rejected this form, outlining his problems @@ -732,7 +732,7 @@ use. def mymethod(f): ... -4. Enforce function argument and return types. Note that this +4. Enforce function argument and return types. Note that this copies the func_name attribute from the old to the new function. func_name was made writable in Python 2.4a3:: @@ -799,13 +799,13 @@ Open Issues into the language at a future point. Guido expressed skepticism about the concept, but various people have made some `strong arguments`_ (search for ``PEP 318 -- posting draft``) on their behalf in - ``python-dev``. It's exceedingly unlikely that class decorators + ``python-dev``. It's exceedingly unlikely that class decorators will be in Python 2.4. .. _strong arguments: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-March/thread.html -2. The choice of the ``@`` character will be re-examined before +2. The choice of the ``@`` character will be re-examined before Python 2.4b1. Copyright