RetroSearch Browse

Thu Apr 21 06:01:35 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-April/052785.html

Shane Holloway (IEEE) wrote:

>     class After:
>         def readIt(self, filename):
>             withFile(filename):
>                 self.readPartA(aFile)
>                 self.readPartB(aFile)
>                 self.readPartC(aFile)
> 
> In my opinion, this is much smoother to read.  This particular example 
> brings up the question of how arguments like "aFile" get passed and 
> named into the block.  I anticipate the need for a place to put an 
> argument declaration list.  ;)

My current thought is that it should look like this:

   with_file(filename) as f:
     do_something_with(f)

The success of this hinges on how many use cases can
be arranged so that the word 'as' makes sense in that
position. What we need is a corpus of use cases so we
can try out different phrasings on them and see what
looks the best for the most cases.

I also have a thought concerning whether the block
argument to the function should come first or last or
whatever. My solution is that the function should take
exactly *one* argument, which is the block. Any other
arguments are dealt with by currying. In other words,
with_file above would be defined as

   def with_file(filename):
     def func(block):
       f = open(filename)
       try:
         block(f)
       finally:
         f.close()
     return func

This would also make implementation much easier. The
parser isn't going to know that it's dealing with anything
other than a normal expression statement until it gets to
the 'as' or ':', by which time going back and radically
re-interpreting a previous function call could be awkward.
This way, the syntax is just

   expr ['as' assignment_target] ':' suite

and the expr is evaluated quite normally.

> Another set of question arose for me when Barry started musing over the 
> combination of blocks and decorators.  What are blocks?  Well, obviously 
> they are callable.  What do they return?  The local namespace they 
> created/modified?

I think the return value of a block should be None.
In constructs like with_file, the block is being used for
its side effect, not to compute a value for consumption
by the block function. I don't see a great need for blocks
to be able to return values.

> How do blocks work with control flow statements like 
> "break", "continue", "yield", and "return"? Perhaps 
> "break" and "continue" raise exceptions similar to StopIteration in this 
> case?

Something like that, yes.

-- 
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury,	   | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a	  |
Christchurch, New Zealand	   | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc.  |
greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz	   +--------------------------------------+

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-April/052785.html below:

[Python-Dev] anonymous blocks