On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> Seems like it would far easier and (IMHO) more useful to scale the proposal
> back from a statement scope to simple expression assignment, and the
> variable is whatever scope it would have been if assigned to outside the
> expression (default being local, but non-local or global if already declared
> as such).
>
> No grammatical grit on anyone's monitor, no confusion about which variable
> is being accessed, and no confusion about the lifetime of that variable
> (okay, no /extra/ confusion ;) .
>
> Maybe somebody could explain why a statement-local limited scope variable is
> better than an ordinary well-understood local-scope variable?  Particularly
> why it's better enough to justify more line-noise in the syntax.  I'm
> willing to be convinced (not happy to, just willing ;) .

Sounds like what you're proposing could be done with the exact syntax
that I'm using, and just remove subscopes from the discussion. (It'd
still need parenthesization, I believe, to prevent syntactic
ambiguities.) As a competing proposal, it's plausible; basically, it
gives Python a way to assign to any name at any time. I'm honestly not
sure which variant would see more backlash :)

That's worthy of a mention in the alternates, at any rate.

ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to