At 10:31 AM 10/28/03 +0100, Alex Martelli wrote: >On Tuesday 28 October 2003 01:11 am, Barry Warsaw wrote: > ... > > What I really want is access to a namespace, and then all the normal > > Python attribute access notations just work. They're one honking great > > idea after all. > >Yes, all in all this does remain my preference, too. I'd take stropping (or >"keyword stropping" a la Greg's "outer x") rather than declarative stuff, >but just getting a namespace (in ways the compiler could recognize, >i.e. by magicnames such as __me__) and then using __me__.x=23 >would require no new syntax and be maximally obvious. Sigh. Why not just: import whatevermynameis whatevermynameis.foo = bar This would be even *more* maximally obvious, as you wouldn't need to know what '__me__' means. :) And how often do you write a module without knowing what its name is, or change the name after you've written it? Plus, thanks to the time machine, it already works. :) Heck, now that I've thought of it, I'm almost tempted to go change all my existing uses of global to this instead...
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