[Python-Dev] Questions about '@' in pep 318

["Martin v. Löwis"]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> Oh dear.  Does this mean that @x is a potential annotation for any
> identifier x?  

Yes. Take a look at the documentation, and the test case.

> I was using __future__ by way of explanation.  I do hope namespaces could
> somehow denote annotations.  My off-the-cuff suggestion was for
> pseudo-modules, so maybe the normal module rules could be sidestepped?

I don't see how this would be possible. The plan is that arbitrary 
callables can be used as decorations, as long as they take a single
argument.

Regards,
Martin