On 27/03/2018 16:22, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:00 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com
<mailto:ncogh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 27 March 2018 at 01:57, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org
<mailto:gu...@python.org>> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Nick Coghlan
<ncogh...@gmail.com <mailto:ncogh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> By contrast, the sublocals idea strives to keep the *lifecycle* impact
>> of naming a subexpression as negligible as possible - while a named
>> subexpression might live a little longer than it used to as an
>> anonymous subexpression (or substantially longer in the case of
>> compound statement headers), it still wouldn't survive past the
end of
>> the statement where it appeared.
>
>
> But this is not new: if you use a for-loop to initialize some
class-level
> structure you have the same problem. There is also a standard
solution
> (just 'del' it).
Right, but that's annoying, too, and adds "Am I polluting a namespace
I care about?" to something that would ideally be a purely statement
local consideration (and currently is for comprehensions and generator
expressions).
The standard reply here is that if you can't tell at a glance whether
that's the case, your code is too complex. The Zen of Python says
"Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!" and
in this case that means refactor into smaller namespaces, i.e.
functions/methods.
This is not always satisfactory. If your for-loop uses 20
already-defined-locals, do you want to refactor it into a function with
20 parameters?
Regards
Rob Cliffe
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
