On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 January 2018 at 15:56, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > > It was get_context() in an earlier version of PEP 567. We changed it to > > copy_context() believing that that would clarify that you get a clone > that > > is unaffected by subsequent ContextVar.set() operations (which affect the > > *current* context rather than the copy you just got). > > Ah thanks. In which case, simply changing the emphasis to avoid the > implication that Context objects are immutable (while that may be true > in a technical/implementation sense, it's not really true in a design > sense if ContextVar.set modifies the value of a variable in a context) > is probably sufficient. Do you have a specific proposal for a wording change? PEP 567 describes Context as "a read-only mapping, implemented using an immutable dictionary." This sounds all right to me -- "read-only" is weaker than "immutable". Maybe the implementation should not be mentioned here? (The crux here is that a given Context acts as a variable referencing an immutable dict -- but it may reference different immutable dicts at different times.) -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ 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
