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/
