[Python-Dev] anonymous blocks

[Shannon -jj Behrens]

I apologize for sparking such debate on this list instead of on
c.l.py.  By the way, the only reason I brought this up was as a
replacement for lambdas in Py3K.

Guido, in response to your much earlier comment about supporting "{}"
for normal defs as a matter of consistency within my proposal, yes, I
agree.  Just like ";", you should rarely use them.

Best Regards,
-jj

On 4/19/05, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> At 01:00 PM 04/19/2005 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > Interestingly, this syntax also works to do decoration, though it's not a
> > > syntax that was ever proposed for that.  e.g.:
> > >
> > > foo = classmethod(foo) where:
> > >      def foo(cls,x,y,z):
> > >          # etc.
> >
> >This requires you to write foo three times, which defeats at least
> >half of the purpose of decorators.
> 
> Well, you could do 'foo = classmethod(x) where: def x(...)', but that *is*
> kind of kludgy.  I'm just suggesting that if 'where:' had existed before
> decorators, people might have griped about the three-time typing or kludged
> around it, but there wouldn't likely have been strong support for creating
> a syntax "just" for decorators.
> 
> Indeed, if somebody had proposed this syntax during the decorator debates I
> would have supported it, but of course Bob Ippolito (whose PyObjC use cases
> involve really long function names) might have disagreed.
> 
> 
> > > foo = property(get_foo,set_foo) where:
> > >      def get_foo(self):
> > >          # ...
> > >      def set_foo(self):
> > >          # ...
> > >
> > > I don't mind @decorators, of course, but maybe they wouldn't be needed
> > here.
> >
> >As I said before, I'm not sure why keeping get_foo etc. out of the
> >class namespace is such a big deal.
> 
> That's a relatively minor thing, compared to being able to logically group
> them with the property, which I think enhances readability, even more than
> the sometimes-proposed '@property.getter' and '@property.setter' decorators.
> 
> Anyway, just to be clear, I don't personally think 'where:' is needed in
> Python 2.x; lambda and decorators suffice for all but the most Twisted use
> cases.  ;)  I was just viewing it as a potential alternative to lambda in Py3K.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/jjinux%40gmail.com
> 


-- 
I have decided to switch to Gmail, but messages to my Yahoo account will
still get through.