On 2021-06-22 7:38 p.m., Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 8:30 AM Soni L. <fakedme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2021-06-22 5:54 p.m., Chris Angelico wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 6:41 AM Soni L. <fakedme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > It would have local scope, similar to uh... locals. Y'know how locals
> > > > are just sugar for locals()['foo'] and stuff? Yeah.
> > >
> > > Not really, no, they're not. :) The dictionary returned by locals()
> > > isn't actually an implementation detail of local name lookups.
> >
> > It's... part of the language. Not an implementation detail. The
> > dictionary returned by locals() is an inherent part of local name
> > lookups, isn't it?
>
> No, it's not. Most definitely not.
>
> https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#locals
Ohh. Fair enough, sorry.
> > > Have you put any thought into how you would deal with the problem of
> > > recursive __dot__ calls?
> >
> > Let it recurse!
> >
> > Globals and locals don't go through __dot__, so you can just... use
> > them. In particular, you can always use getattr(), and probably should.
> > Or even set __dot__ to getattr inside it, like so:
> >
> > def __dot__(left, right):
> > __dot__ = getattr
> > foo.bar # same as getattr(foo, "bar") because we set (local) __dot__
> > to getattr above
>
> I can't actually pin down what I'm averse to here, but it gives me a
> really REALLY bad feeling. You're expecting every attribute lookup to
> now look for a local or global name __dot__ (or, presumably, a
> nonlocal, class, or builtin), and do whatever that does. That seems
> like a really effective foot-gun.
>
> Have you actually tried designing this into a larger project to see
> what problems you run into, or is this something you've only
> considered at this trivial level?
1. It's opt-in.
2. It's designed to be used by a hypothetical extension methods module,
but without imposing any design constraints on such module. It could
return a named function every time a given name is looked up (a la "bind
the first argument" operator), or do dynamic dispatch based on types or
ABCs (a la proper extension methods).
In practice, you don't def your own __dot__, but rather use someone
else's "__dot__ builder". If you don't wanna deal with it, just don't
use __dot__.
It's also useful for the occasional domain-specific language.
>
> ChrisA
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/YOPTCIYV4GSW3N7EA7KPLJBKNVSNANXZ/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/LQW3GLWRGPOZDOAS7LGUL4WLP6JOUKUR/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
