Terry J. Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> added the comment:
I am opposed at this time. Leaving loop variables available is an intended feature of python. After reading point 1, I was tempted to say that you are making a fetish of typing or making the tail wag the dog. I mention this because others might have similar reactions. After reading points 2 and 3, I am much more favorable and would allow changes in idlelib if any were needed. A cleaner dir and help listing affects everyone. I changed the title to be more 'neutral'. 'Leak' is perjorative. "we need to remove these names" is a bit misleading as it implies total removal, which is not the proposal. As it is, the PR applies a style standard on the stdlib that is not in PEP 8. I recommend that you start by proposing an addition to PEP-8. "Unless X, global loop variables should be explicitly deleted as soon as not needed. Or use a comprehension." (I checked and 'loop' does not currently appear in PEP-8, and none of the 5 examples I checked could use a comprehension.) If you do, I recommend starting with dir and help, with typing third. You might post the idea on pydev and ask how much and what sort of discussion is needed. ---------- nosy: +terry.reedy title: Multiple modules leak `for` loop variables into module's namespace -> Delete module-level loop variables when no longer needed _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue46565> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
