El dom, 7 feb 2021 a las 3:08, MRAB (<python@mrabarnett.plus.com>) escribió:
On 2021-02-07 00:57, Jonathan Crall wrote:
[snip]
To be clear, in the proposed syntax:
if [condition] with [obj]: [code]
Would behave exactly as:
if [condition]: with [obj]: [code]
Is there any chance that this conditional context manager syntax might be considered? Does anyone but myself think this might be a good idea?
-1. It's not that much shorter. You wouldn't be saving much typing or space.
TL;DR: -1 for other reasons Space saved is similar to (really not necesary, but very convenient) `elif`: 4 spaces by line. My doubts are not by space saved, instead are for convenience. Nested ifs are very common contruction and there are not much to thing about. I doubt than `with` after `if` and with same scope that `if` isn't a very improbable structure. Other thing strange about proposal is: why only with after if? What about `else` (in `if`, `for`, `while`), `elif`, `for`, `while`? And in `try`, `except`, `else`, `finally`? When is coherent an mixed `with` and when not? As programmer I wan't think too much about language, so I need consistence to get focused in resolve problems with it. If I see uncommon `with` after `if` with same scope to be convenient, the other constructions needed to coherence and consistence in language seems very very strange to need (or even think in) syntactic sugar. regards, Javi