Guido van Rossum wrote:
> A variation on this with somewhat different semantics swaps the keywords:
>
> in EXPR for VAR:
> BLOCK
>
> If you don't need the variable, you can leave the "for VAR" part out:
>
> in EXPR:
> BLOCK
>
> Too cute? :-)
>
I don't think it reads well. I would prefer something that would be
understandable for a newbie's eyes, even if it fits more with common
usage than with the real semantics behind it. For example a Boost-like
keyword like:
scoped EXPR as VAR:
BLOCK
scoped EXPR:
BLOCK
We may argue that it doesn't mean a lot, but at least if a newbie sees
the following code, he would easily guess what it does:
scoped synchronized(mutex):
scoped opening(filename) as file:
...
When compared with:
in synchronized(mutex):
in opening(filename) for file:
...
As a C++ programmer, I still dream I could also do:
scoped synchronized(mutex)
scoped opening(filename) as file
...
which would define a block until the end of the current block...
Regards,
Nicolas
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