RetroSearch Browse

Mon Mar 10 04:29:47 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133000.html

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Jim J. Jewett <jimjjewett at gmail.com> wrote:
> The PEP should therefore explicitly state that implementation details
> may force the deferral to be permanent, and that this is considered an
> acceptable trade-off.

How about words to this effect?

"""Should there be, in future, a way to create a true subscope (which
could simplify comprehensions, except expressions, with blocks, and
possibly more), then this proposal could be revived; until then, its
loss is not a great one..."""

(I parked the time machine in the PSU's garage, thanks for lending me it!)

(The PSU does not exist, and therefore does not have a garage.)

ChrisA

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133000.html below:

[Python-Dev] Scope issues [was: Alternative forms [was: PEP 463: Exception-catching expressions]]