On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Mike Miller <python-dev at mgmiller.net> wrote: > On 2018-04-20 14:59, Jelle Zijlstra wrote: >> In other words, the with statement would continue to require an as >> clause >> outside of the parentheses. A double name binding doesn't seem very >> useful >> however. >> >> The with statement does not require an as clause. > > Sorry, more precisely a contenxt-manager object to be returned. So perhaps > this "with" issue may not be one at all. That's completely different, and isn't a syntactic point. They may bomb with AttributeError at run time, but they also may not. > My expectations: > > with open(fn) as f: # current behavior > with (open(fn) as f): # syntax error, missing clause > with closing(urlopen(url)) as dl: # current behavior > with closing(urlopen(url) as dl): # syntax error, missing clause > with (closing(urlopen(url)) as dl): # syntax error, missing clause The second and fifth could be special cased as either the same as first and third, or as SyntaxErrors. (But which?) The fourth one is very tricky. If 'expr as name' is allowed inside arbitrary expressions, why shouldn't it be allowed there? The disconnect between viable syntax and useful statements is problematic here. ChrisA
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