On 1/11/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 03:33 PM 1/11/2007 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: > >Yes, I already see it that way. It would be nice if the rule for 'as' > >targets were as consistent as possible (ie, at least the same for except > >and with) > > No can do - with needs tuples, except isn't getting them. > > If we did allow tuples in both cases, the "except" ones wouldn't be cleared > at the end of the block, but the "with" ones would... unless we decided to > make them all go away. There might be sane reasons for doing that with > "with", but I'm not sure those reasons apply to "except".
We can allow tuples for 'except' at the grammar level, same as 'with'; it's just that anyone trying it would get the usual "TypeError: unpack non-sequence" since the exceptions-as-sequence behaviour is going away. Collin Winter _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
