I'm leaning towards a -0.5 right now myself, simply because of the ambiguities that have been mentioned, python is anything but ambiguous, and that's a distinction I like about it, in every case I can think of python does what you'd expect without random oh, but there is this qualifier in this context .. (*cough* perl *cough* ruby *cough*).. even if I think I like the syntax, it doesn't really make sense to implement it at this time, or likely ever.
I got the inspiration for the idea from delphi/pascal, but in retrospect it turns out that the primary large (~1million lines) commercial app I worked on where we used that syntax (heavily I might add), they started to phase out the use of the with statement all over the code because of these same abiguities creating obscure difficult to track down bugs.
Prozacgod <prozacgod@...> writes:This sounds very PHP-like (doing indirections like $$foo because there isn't any
>
> My main motivation most likely is just that it would open up some very
> interesting meta-programing or dynamic programming opportunities, variables
> that exists entirely programmatically without the prefix of
> object_instance.foo, surely just syntactical sugar to some (or even most) -
powerful introspection or OO system, and many things (e.g. functions, classes)
aren't first-class objects and can't be passed as parameters). I don't think
Python should grow something like that; instead people should learn more
structured ways of accessing data. getattr() and friends are powerful enough for
playing access tricks.
(in other words: -1 from me)
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas