J2 0-2-6 is available

Doug Holton insert at spam.here
Wed Aug 25 04:22:21 CEST 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:
>>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.

     .author = "François Pinard"
def foo(cls):

def bar():
with bar:
     .version = "0.2.4"

So if I say:
with self:
     .version = 3
Is that supposed to mean:
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