RetroSearch Browse

Fri May 6 12:20:31 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053442.html

On Thursday 05 May 2005 16:03, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> The discussion on the meaning of break when nesting a PEP 340 block
> statement inside a for loop has given me some real reasons to prefer PEP
> 310's single pass  semantics for user defined statements 

That also solves a problem with resource acquisition block generators that I 
hadnt been able to articulate until now. What about resources whose lifetimes 
are more complex than a lexical block, where you cant use a block statement? 
It seems quite natural for code that want to manage its own resources to call 
__enter__ and __exit__ directly. Thats not true of the block generator API.

-- 
Toby Dickenson

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053442.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 340: Non-looping version (aka PEP 310 redux)