On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:28 AM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > Block scoping adds semantic and implementation complexity and annoyance, > while giving very little benefit. No thank you. > > > > def foo(): > > let x = 1 > > if bar: > > let x = 2 > > ... > > # x is 1 again here > > Is there a shortage of variable names that you have to reuse the same > name "x" for two distinct variables? > > I know that "naming things" is classically one of the hard problems of > computer science, but this is taking things to an extreme. >
I spy the Blub Paradox here. Since you don't use lexical scoping, you don't like it, don't want it, and see no value in it. I use lexical scoping all the time, and it doesn't lead to the stupidities you're implying that it does; in fact, it can be used to make code much clearer and easier to reason about, because - quite the contrary to what you're saying here - you can use distinct variable names, and have a guarantee that the variable can't be misused outside of its intended scope. This wouldn't really apply as cleanly to Python, since the rest of the function could potentially use a global with the same name, but please, stop assuming and asserting that block scoping must inherently be both useless and confusing. (And there are a number of very VERY good - albeit unusual - uses for name reuse. It's not that we can't think of different names. It's that we specifically WANT the same name, since it is serving the same purpose. In the absence of sub-function scoping, we're forced to invent arbitrarily different names, and that doesn't actually improve clarity at all.) ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/OP3TJGHYGMNQXCIC3SCV7I6DQSZJTMIE/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
