data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3c3b2/3c3b2a6eec514cc32680936fa4e74059574d2631" alt=""
On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 9:21 PM Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 2:52 PM David Mertz, Ph.D. <david.mertz@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 11:46 PM David Mertz, Ph.D.
def f(x=defer: a + b): a, b = 3, 5 return x
Would this return 8, or a defer-expression? If 8, then the scope isn't
truly dynamic, since there's no way to keep it deferred until it moves to another scope. If not 8, then I'm not sure how you'd define the scope or what triggers its evaluation.
Oh... Keep in mind I'm proposing a strawman deliberately, but the most
natural approach to keeping an object deferred rather than evaluated is simply to say so:
def f(x=defer: a + b): a, b = 3, 5 fn2(defer: x) # look for local a, b within fn2() if needed # ... other stuff return x # return 8 here
How would it know to look for a and b inside fn2's scope, instead of looking for x inside fn2's scope?
I am worried that this side-thread about dynamic scopes (which are a ridiculous idea IMO) will derail the decent proposal of the PEP. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-c...>