The latter, the former isn't currently syntax (as in `with [a, b, c]"` will throw an error). This was, however, mainly if we were using a variant of the with syntax, since having
But take the following example:
def func(ctx):
with ns: # namespace
with ctx: # only known at runtime
.attr
You can't have that be a compile time error. Which actually makes the specific syntax of a bare `with` a strong -1 now, since mixing it with normal context managers is incredibly ambiguous. This would either need to be `in` or `given` as mentioned elsewhere, or something like with `Magic_Namespace_Object(ns):`
--Josh
On 02/05/16 23:28, Joshua Morton wrote:
> > It is not reasonable to expect an error to be generated at runtime:
> > because each and every object would have to be queried as to whether
> > they have the attribute to know if there is ambiguity on each and every
> > reference to an attribute.
>
> It absolutely is:
It almost certainly is not ;)
> if you're using an "inferred" syntax like
>
> in object:
> .value
>
> but there are multiple such objects to look at, Python immediately
> throws an error,
It is not clear what you mean by "multiple such objects". Do you mean
that 'object' can be some sort of sequence, or do you mean that the
syntax used for multiple objects is "in object0, object1:" or similar?
If the latter, then given the choice between the two, I would agree with
some sort of compile time error over a runtime exception. Why wait until
runtime?
If the former (which might mean a runtime error is appropriate), then
you need to explain what you are suggesting in a lot more detail.
Regards, E.