On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Koos Zevenhoven <k7ho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Koos Zevenhoven <k7ho...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 3:49 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> > wrote: > >> [..] > >> >> > >> >> I think PEP 550 is sufficient to allow implementing all > >> >> your proposed APIs (and that if it isn't, that's a bug in PEP 550). > >> > > >> > > >> > That's not true either. The LocalContext-based semantics introduces > >> > scope > >> > barriers that affect *all* variables. You might get close by putting > >> > just > >> > one variable in a LogicalContext and then nest them, but PEP 550 does > >> > not > >> > allow this in all cases. With the addition of PEP 521 and some > trickery, > >> > it > >> > might. > >> > >> I think you have a wrong idea about PEP 550 specification. I > >> recommend you to reread it carefully, otherwise we can't have a > >> productive discussion here. > >> > > > > I'm sorry, by LocalContext I meant LogicalContext, and by "nesting" > them, I > > meant stacking them. It is in fact nesting in terms of value scopes. > > I don't actually care if you use the latest terminology. You seem to > have a wrong idea about how PEP 550 really works (and its full > semantics), because things you say here about it don't make any sense. > In PEP 550, introducing a new LogicalContext on the ExecutionContext affects the scope of any_ var.set(value) for * any * any_var . Does that not make sense? –– Koos -- + Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
