On Aug 26, 2017, at 14:15, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov.ml@gmail.com> wrote:
Elvis just added it: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0550/#replication-of-threading-local-int...
Thanks, that’s exactly what I was looking for. Great summary of the issue.
That said, if we have to use method lookup, then I agree that `.get()` is a better choice than `.lookup()`. But in that case, would it be possible to add an optional `default=None` argument so that you can specify a marker object for a missing value? I worry that None might be a valid value in some cases, but that currently can’t be distinguished from “missing”.
Nathaniel has a use case where he needs to know if the value is in the topmost LC or not.
One way to address that need is to have the following signature for lookup():
lookup(*, default=None, traverse=True)
IMO "lookup" is a slightly better name in this particular context.
Given that signature (which +1), I agree. You could add keywords for debugging lookup fairly easily too. Cheers, -Barry