On 5 May, 13:33, Luis Zarrabeitia <ky...@uh.cu> wrote: > 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__).
One issue with automatically binding a local variable to the current function is with nested functions: def foo() def bar(): # How do I call foo() from here? One solution would be def foo() def bar(foo=__this__): foo() I don't know, it does not convince me ATM. -- Arnaud -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list