On Monday 27 October 2003 06:08 pm, Neal Norwitz wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 08:51:16AM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
The only problem with using :: is a syntactic ambiguity:
a[x::y]
already means something (an extended slice with start=x, no stop, and step=y).
I'm not wedded to the :: digraph, I prefer the concept. :: was nice because it re-used a similar concept from C++. No other digraph jumps
Does it have to be a digraph? We could use one of the ASCII chars Python doesn't use. For example, $ would give us exactly the same way as Ruby to strop global variables (though, differently from Ruby, we'd only _have_ to strop them on rebinding -- more-common "read" accesses would stay clean) -- $variable meaning 'global'. And scope$variable meaning 'outer'. OTOH, if we used @ instead, it would read better the other way 'round -- variable@scope DOES look like a pretty natural way to indicate "said variable at said scope" -- though it doesn't read quite as well _without_ a scope. Alex