On 7/5/06, Just van Rossum <just at letterror.com> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > On 7/5/06, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> 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*. Hallo broer! :-) I wonder what this should mean then: def outer(): def inner(): x := 1 What is x's scope? Also, a := operator allows all sorts of left-hand sides that don't necessarily make sense, e.g. x.foo := 1 x[0] := 1 -- --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