[Holger] > > 1. Decide on a keyword to use, if any. > > I just read the PEP340 basically the first time so bear with me. Thanks for reviewing! > First i note that introducing a keyword 'block' would break > lots of programs, among it half of PyPy. Unlike many other > keywords 'block' is a pretty common variable name. For > invoking blocktemplates i like the no-keyword approach, instead. Good point (the code from Queue.py quoted by Jim Jewett also uses block as a variable name :-). There has been much argument on both sides. I guess we may need to have a subcommittee to select the keyword (if any) ... Maybe if we can't go without a keyword, 'with' would be okay after all; I'm not so strongly in favor of a Pascal/VB-style with-statement after reading the C# developers' comments (see reference in the PEP). > However, i would find it much clearer if *defining* blocktemplates > used a new keyword, like: > > blocktemplate opening(filename, mode="r"): > ... > > because this immediately tells me what the purpose and semantics > of the folowing definition is. The original overloading of 'def' to > mean generators if the body contains a yield statement was already a > matter of discussion (ASFAIK). When i came to Python it was at 2.2 > and i remember wondering about this "def" oddity. > > Extending poor old 'def' functions now to possibly mean block > templates gives me semantical overload even if it is justified > from an implementation point of view. I am talking purely > about (my sense of) code readability here not about implementation. Hm... Maybe you also want to have separate function and procedure keywords? Or static typing? 'def' can be used to define all sorts of things, that is Python's beauty! -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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