RetroSearch Browse

Thu May 5 15:23:39 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053397.html

On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:58:02 +0200
"Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:

> I haven't followed the PEP 340 discussion in detail,
> but as the PEP doesn't list keywords that have been
> considered and rejected, I'd like to propose my own:
> use "after" instead of "block":
> 
> after opening("/etc/passwd") as f:
>   for line in f:
>      print line.rstrip()
> 
> after locking(myLock):
>   # code that needs to hold the lock
> 

 And *after* fits very nice for the examples above.
 However, it might get weird for:

    after transaction(db):
        # code inbetween new_trasn/ commit_or_abort

 The code pattern that will 'wrap' the block might
 not always make sense with the chosen keyword, if
 that keyword is not semantically neutral.
 (not time-related, not function-related, etc).

 Notice that is _no keyword_ is chosen, nothing prevents us
 from using (even if by aliasing):

   after_opening("/etc/passwd") as f:
       for line in f:
           print line.rstrip()

   after_locking(myLock):
       # code that needs to hold the lock

My two cents.
Senra

-- 
Rodrigo Senra                 
--
MSc Computer Engineer    rodsenra(at)gpr.com.br  
GPr Sistemas Ltda        http://www.gpr.com.br/ 
Personal Blog     http://rodsenra.blogspot.com/

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053397.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 340 keyword: after