On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org>wrote:
Andrew McNabb writes:
You're proposing that the "awful" workaround be made magical, builtin, and available to be used in any situation whether appropriate or not?
No, I'm not. That would look like this:
print('{spam} and {eggs}'.format())
Ah, OK, that's right. Just goes to show that foo(=spam, =eggs) is really too confusing to be used. ;-)
I think you've just been reading all the mails in this thread of people claiming I eat children and worship satan :P
I'll take the explicit use of locals any time.
I don't think anyone likes the idea of magically passing locals into all function calls.
My apologies, I didn't really think anybody wants "'{foo}'.format()" to DWIM. The intended comparison was to the proposed syntax, which I think is confusing and rather ugly.
Yet obviously people DO do stuff like: _('{foo}') which walks the stack to find the locals and then puts them in there. I think this shows there is some room for a middle ground that might disincentivize people from going to those extremes :P Again, it's not about the exact syntax I suggested, it's about that middle ground.