On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > In favor of ImplicitContext is one point: it is indeed "implicit" if you > compare it with the "explicit" way of passing state around, which would > require an extra argument containing the state for any function that uses > the state *or calls a function that uses the state* (recursively).
This is a good point, now I understand the reasoning better. I guess I'm looking at this from a perspective of PEP 550 users. They will use either ContextKey-like API described in the PEP now, or something similar to threading.local() to store values in the context of a generator or an async task. From the standpoint of the user, they work with some sort of of a "global" variable. To me, renaming LC to ImplicitContext sounds similar to saying that using global variables is implicit, or calling "global" scope "implicit". Yury _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
