I know. I elided including the nonexistent `nonlocals()` in there. But it *should* be `lngb()`. Or call it scope(). :-) On Aug 10, 2015 10:09 AM, "Steven D'Aprano" <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2015 at 06:14:18PM -0700, David Mertz wrote: > > [...] > > That said, there *is* one small corner where I believe f-strings add > > something helpful to the language. There is no really concise way to > spell: > > > > collections.ChainMap(locals(), globals(), __builtins__.__dict__). > > I think that to match the normal name resolution rules, nonlocals() > needs to slip in there between locals() and globals(). I realise that > there actually isn't a nonlocals() function (perhaps there should be?). > > > If we could spell that as, say `lgb()`, that would let str.format() or > > %-formatting pick up the full "what's in scope". To my mind, that's the > > only good thing about the f-string idea. > > I like the concept, but not the name. Initialisms tend to be hard > to remember and rarely self-explanatory. How about scope()? > > > -- > Steve > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mertz%40gnosis.cx >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com