Holger Krekel <hpk at trillke.net> writes: > hello, > > admittedly i only followed Brett's very nice summaries (thanks!) > in the last month so i may have missed some details. But here are a few > comments regarding "PEP 310 Reliable Acquisition/Release Pairs". > > The PEP actually is about interacting with the execution > of a code block. It allows to define (one-shot) interception points > for entering and leaving a code block. Now there are at least > two interesting cases which the PEP does (quite explicitely) not cover: > > - what to do with exceptions > > - what to do with yield > > IMHO introducing a new block statement at this stage in language > development warrants an effort to tackle these cases (and maybe more > like e.g. allowing the handler to trigger looping). > > This is probably best done with trying to directly design a protocol between > the "interpreter-loop" and the - what i'd call - the "execution handler". Well, in writing PEP 310 (as I suspect you know) I was aiming for a simple, almost entirely syntactic way of shortening a common pattern. You seem to be gunning for something far deeper here. [...] > So while i am not strictly against the proposal i'd humbly ask for > not hurrying into accepting the PEP as is. Python 2.4 is not closeby > so i hope there is still some time to discuss this. While I agree and am in no hurry to rush, I'm not sure I see that accepting PEP 310 as is necessarily hinders your more subtle aims... Cheers, mwh -- SCSI is not magic. There are fundamental technical reasons why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4