Terry Reedy dixit (2012年06月05日, 12:42): > On 6/5/2012 8:09 AM, nick.coghlan wrote: > > > Add PEP 422: Dynamic Class Decorators [snip] > >+So too will the following be roughly equivalent (aside from inheritance):: > >+ > >+ class C: > >+ __decorators__ = [deco2, deco1] > > I think you should just store the decorators in the correct order of use > + __decorators__ = [deco1, deco2] > and avoid the nonsense (time-waste) of making an indirect copy via > list_iterator and reversing it each time the attribute is used.
+1. For @-syntax the inverted order seems to be somehow natural. But I feel the list order should not mimic that... *** Another idea: what about... @@dynamic_deco2 @@dynamic_deco1 class C: pass ...being an equivalent of: class C: __decorators__ = [dynamic_deco1, dynamic_deco2] ...as well as of: @@dynamic_deco2 class C: __decorators__ = [dynamic_deco1] ? Cheers. *j _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com