[Python-Dev] Thoughts on "contexts". PEPs 550, 555, 567, 568

[Koos Zevenhoven]

On Jan 10, 2018 07:17, "Yury Selivanov" <yselivanov.ml at gmail.com> wrote:

Wasn't PEP 555 rejected by Guido? What's the point of this post?


I sure hope there is a point. I don't think mentioning PEP 555 in the
discussions should hurt.

A typo in my post btw: should be "PEP 567 (+568 ?)" in the second paragraph
of course.

-- Koos (mobile)


Yury

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:08 AM Koos Zevenhoven <k7hoven at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I feel like I should write some thoughts regarding the "context"
> discussion, related to the various PEPs.
>
> I like PEP 567 (+ 567 ?) better than PEP 550. However, besides providing
> cvar.set(), I'm not really sure about the gain compared to PEP 555 (which
> could easily have e.g. a dict-like interface to the context). I'm still not
> a big fan of "get"/"set" here, but the idea was indeed to provide those on
> top of a PEP 555 type thing too.
>
> "Tokens" in PEP 567, seems to resemble assignment context managers in PEP
> 555. However, they feel a bit messy to me, because they make it look like
> one could just set a variable and then revert the change at any point in
> time after that.
>
> PEP 555 is in fact a simplification of my previous sketch that had a
> .set(..) in it, but was somewhat different from PEP 550. The idea was to
> always explicitly define the scope of contextvar values. A context manager
> / with statement determined the scope of .set(..) operations inside the
> with statement:
>
> # Version A:
> cvar.set(1)
> with context_scope():
>     cvar.set(2)
>
>     assert cvar.get() == 2
>
> assert cvar.get() == 1
>
> Then I added the ability to define scopes for different variables
> separately:
>
> # Version B
> cvar1.set(1)
> cvar2.set(2)
> with context_scope(cvar1):
>     cvar1.set(11)
>     cvar2.set(22)
>
> assert cvar1.get() == 1
> assert cvar2.get() == 22
>
>
> However, in practice, most libraries would wrap __enter__, set and
> __exit__ into another context manager. So maybe one might want to allow
> something like
>
> # Version C:
> assert cvar.get() == something
> with context_scope(cvar, 2):
>     assert cvar.get() == 2
>
> assert cvar.get() == something
>
>
> But this then led to combining "__enter__" and ".set(..)" into
> Assignment.__enter__ -- and "__exit__" into Assignment.__exit__ like this:
>
> # PEP 555 draft version:
> assert cvar.value == something
> with cvar.assign(1):
>     assert cvar.value == 1
>
> assert cvar.value == something
>
>
> Anyway, given the schedule, I'm not really sure about the best thing to do
> here. In principle, something like in versions A, B and C above could be
> done (I hope the proposal was roughly self-explanatory based on earlier
> discussions). However, at this point, I'd probably need a lot of help to
> make that happen for 3.7.
>
> -- Koos
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> yselivanov.ml%40gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20180110/54c1aa7c/attachment.html>