On 2018-04-21 19:57, Chris Angelico wrote:
Thanks for being patient.
Looks like the crux of the issue is that "with … as" binds the result of the
enter function rather than the context-manager object, as it might first appear.
Therefore it's not compatible with how "as" is used for direct name bindings
after "import" statements or this sub-proposal. Additionally, "except Class as
instance" names the instance rather than the class.
So, the "as" keyword is already operating at an intuitive level rather than
idealistic perfection. Three different semantics for import/with/except,
correct? This sub-proposal lines up with the import use, I believe.
Given that there are no use cases for using assignment-expressions in the
import/with/except statements, and it could be documented that if one insists an
extra set of parens could make it work:
with (callable() as cm_obj) as enter_result_obj:
pass
It doesn't feel like this issue should be a blocker.
TL;DR - Been feebly trying to make the argument that everyday "intuitive
consistency" (where the expression will be used) is more important than avoiding
theoretical problems. I've never seen complex with/except statements in the
wild and don't expect this feature to significantly alter that.
-Mike
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