Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Robert Kern: [...] >> No, it only argues that "with Cleanup():" is supernumerary. > > I don't know what "supernumerary" means, but to the degree that the > argument says anything about a construct that is not 'finally', it says > the same about general "with". > So rather than look up the meaning if a word you aren't familiar with you will argue against its use in generic style?
> So whatever you mean by supernumerary, you're saying that the argument > implies that "with" is supernumerary. > > This is starting to look like some earlier discussions in this group, > where even basic logic is denied. > Why not just stick to the facts and forget about the earlier discussions? regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010 http://us.pycon.org/ Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ UPCOMING EVENTS: http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
