On 3 June 2017 at 20:59, Daniel Bershatsky <bepshatsky@yandex.ru> wrote:
Dear Python Developers,
We have a potential idea for enhancing Python. You will find a kind of draft bellow.
Thank you for taking the time to write this up!
Best regards, Daniel Bershatsky
Abstract ========
This PEP proposes the introduction of new syntax to create community standard, readable and clear way to defered function execution in basic block on all control flows.
Proposal ========
There is not any mechanism to defer the execution of function in python.
There is, thanks to context managers: import contextlib def foo(i): print(i) def bar(): with contextlib.ExitStack() as stack: stack.callback(foo, 42) print(3.14) bar() Now, defer is certainly pithier, but thanks to contextlib2, the above code can be used all the way back to Python 2.6, rather than being limited to running on 3.7+. I was also motivated enough to *write* ExitStack() to solve this problem, but even I don't use it often enough to consider it worthy of being a builtin, let alone syntax. So while I'm definitely sympathetic to the use case (otherwise ExitStack wouldn't have a callback() method), "this would be useful" isn't a sufficient argument in this particular case - what's needed is a justification that this pattern of resource management is common enough to justify giving functions an optional implicit ExitStack instance and assigning a dedicated keyword for adding entries to it. Alternatively, the case could be made that there's a discoverability problem, where folks aren't necessarily being pointed towards ExitStack as a dynamic resource management tool when that's what they need, and to consider what could be done to help resolve that (with adding a new kind of statement being just one of the options evaluated). Cheers, Nick. P.S. Nikolas Rauth has a more in-depth write-up of the utility of ExitStack here: https://www.rath.org/on-the-beauty-of-pythons-exitstack.html -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia