Re: [Python-Dev] New syntax for 'dynamic' attribute access

[Marek \Baczek\ Baczyński]

2007/2/12, Benji York [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Collin Winter wrote:
  There's a connection, but I'd say it's the wrong one. In C, x-y
  dereferences x, while in Python, x-y would dereference y. That's
  just begging for trouble.

 Then the syntax should obviously be x-y.

delurk
Someone with OCaml background could confuse that with an assignment evil_grin/
/delurk

-- 
Marek Baczyński
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Explicit Lexical Scoping (pre-PEP?)

[Marek \Baczek\ Baczyński]

2006/7/5, Just van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Guido van Rossum wrote:

  On 7/5/06, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Did you also consider and reject:
  
   * Alternate binding operators (e.g. :=, .=, etc.)
 
  Brr.

 That's too bad :(

 I still find a rebinding operator (:= being my favorite) much, *much*
 more appealing than any of the alternative proposals. It's beautifully
 symmetrical with assignment means local. It also pretty much makes the
 global statement redundant.

 The only downside I see is that it may cause a fairly big shift in
 style: I for one would use := for rebinding local names. While I think
 that would be an improvement (eg. by catching typo's earlier), it's
 *different*.

delurk

I suggest - as an assignment operator instead of := - it's used in
OCaml and it looks *very* different, yet still makes sense.

  x = 0
  print x
  def f():
x =  1 # bind locally
print x
  def g():
x - 42 # assign lexically
print x
  f()
  print x
  g()
  print x

prints

0
1
0
42
42

/delurk
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com