Nick Coghlan wrote:
> The second occurrence of "context manager" is meant to say "context":
>
> This PEP proposes that the protocol used by the with statement be
> known as the "context management protocol", and that objects that
> implement that protocol be known as "context managers". The term
> "context" then encompasses all objects with a __context__()
> method that returns a context object.
>
> And the parenthetical comment was completely backwards and should have read:
>
> (This means that all context managers are contexts, but not all contexts are
> context managers).
>
> The reason for recommending that context managers should be contexts is
> similar to the reason that iterators should be iterables - so that doing the
> __context__() call manually will still give you something that can be used in
> a with statement.
Ah, all is explained by svn blame, with a little help from svn log.
When Phillip went through to make the terminology consistent he actually
swapped the meanings of "context" (which meant 'has a __context__ method' in
the original PEP) and "context manager" (which meant 'has __enter__ and
__exit__ methods and a __context__ method that returns self' in the original PEP).
I clearly wasn't paying attention when that diff went past on the checkins
list, but I'd humbly request that we change it back :)
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
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