J2 0-2-6 is available
Doug Holton
insert at spam.here
Tue Aug 24 22:22:21 EDT 2004
Robert Brewer wrote:
> Steven Bethard wrote:
>
>>Actually, there's an interesting argument that the "with" for
>>decorators and
>>the "with" above can be thought of in similar terms:
>>
>>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2004-August/235993.html
>>
>>I don't know if I agree with it, but I think I'm at least
>>convinced they don't
>>have to mean *completely* different things.
>
>
> FYI, I'm linking to that in the next document version later tonight.
>
Your example from the mailing list (copied below) doesn't make sense if
you mix and match the beginning period, and it is bizaar to have "with:"
mean "affects a future function" while "with x:" means "within the x
namespace", something very different. I would not recommend using the
same keyword for two entirely different transformations, one which
solely affects functions defined in the future and the other which is a
regular code block but without having to repeat the same prefix (like
self) over and over.
with:
classmethod
.author = "François Pinard"
def foo(cls):
pass
def bar():
pass
with bar:
staticmethod
.version = "0.2.4"
So if I say:
with self:
init
.version = 3
Is that supposed to mean:
init(self)
self.version = 3?
So not using a period suddenly means "pass the previous or future
defined variable or function to me and I'll do something to it now or in
the future"?
More information about the Python-list
mailing list