On Tuesday 05 May 2009 02:46:58 am Chris Rebert wrote: > <devils_advocate> > Adding syntax is EVIL(tm) for it angers the Gods of Backwards > Compatibility, and this proposal is completely unnecessary because you > could instead just write: [...] > And there would be much clashing with existing variable names, > for keywords are the Devil's work! > </devils_advocate>
Heh. I liked the proposal (though I'm not 100% sold on the name __this__), and one of the reasons I liked it was... it preempted the name-clashing argument. Not a new keyword, just a variable that is injected on the local namespace, so it would only clash with code that uses __this__ as a global (or that expects to use an unbound __this__). Btw, is there any way to inject a name into a function's namespace? Following the python tradition, maybe we should try to create a more general solution! K. (P.S: there is one advantage on having it as a keyword, though: it would make static analisis easier) -- Luis Zarrabeitia (aka Kyrie) Fac. de Matemática y Computación, UH. http://profesores.matcom.uh.cu/~kyrie -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list