Nick Coghlan wrote:
So, keep the PEP 3150 syntax, but don't make the inner suite special aside from the out of order execution?
That's right. If we're willing to accept the idea of the def in a postdef statement binding a name in the surrounding scope, then we've already decided that we don't care about polluting the main scope -- and it would make PEP 3150 a heck of a lot easier to both specify and implement. Having said that, I think there might be a way of implementing PEP 3150 with scoping and all that isn't too bad. The main difficulties seem to concern class scopes. Currently they're kept in a dict while they're being built, like function local scopes used to be before they were optimised. We could change that so that they're compiled in the same way as a normal function scope, and then use the equivalent of locals() at the end to build the class dict. The body of a 'given' statement could then be compiled as a separate function with access to the class scope. Nested 'def' and 'class' statements, on the other hand, would be compiled with the surrounding scope deliberately excluded. -- Greg