Suggestions for python 2

[Evan Simpson]

Bernhard Herzog <herzog at online.de> wrote in message
news:m3embfz6p5.fsf at greebo.nodomain.de...
> > Edward Welbourne <eddy at vortigen.demon.co.uk> writes:
> [snip]
> > > Three new kinds of argument come into being (with my given spelling):
> > >   * safe tunnel: after both * and **
> > >   * keyword-only: after * but not **
> > >   * positional-only: after ** but not *
[objections to proposal]
>
> I'll second that. Turning a kludge that works because of an
> implementation detail into an officially supported feature isn't a good
> idea, IMO. Support for lexical scoping is the correct approach.
[snip]
> lexical scoping would take care of that, unless I'm missing something.

Now that two people have asserted that lexical scoping is the right way to
handle this, I'd like to know what they *mean* by lexical scoping.

How would names get bound to (or just initialized from?) names in lexically
enclosing scopes?  Implicitly? Explicitly?
Would we still declare module-global variables, or would they use the same
mechanism as names in intermediate scopes?

I rather like the idea of having to explicitly bring names into an inner
scope, and with semantics identical to parameter defaults.  Why is this so
objectionable?  Is it just the syntax?

Cheers,

Evan @ 4-am