Say I do
with a:
b()
Perhaps I am mistaken but I do not see a way for b to refer to a. Say
a contains a counter. I would like b() to increment that counter. How
do I do it without explicitly passing a to b?
Massimo
On Jul 13, 7:24 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Re: Proposed syntax - I might agree; it is just a request for syntax (I to
> don't see the motivation, other than - as Joe says - sytactic sugar;)
>
> Re: with statement - I think it has uses, and I can see immediately one
> place I would put it in, and could probably find a few more places where it
> would be of good use.
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>
> > I repeat. I do not see how it would be possible to implement the
> > proposed syntax without major changes in the definition of the helpers
> > and that would be slow when compared with the current implementation.
> > Perhaps I am wrong.
>
> > Whether or not this is a good idea, if I am wrong, I would like to see
> > a patch that implements this for the DIV helper.
>
> > Massimo
>
> > On Jul 13, 7:07 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think you are both missing important point:
>
> > > classes which support context would be able to be used in "with"
> > contexts";
> > > Nothing would be more complex or slower - you'd only use it to make
> > things
> > > cleaner (move code into class _enter_() and _exit_() methods, which would
> > > only get called (I presume) on with use anyway... If you have the code
> > in
> > > one place instead of scattered, there is nothing slower or more complex -
> > to
> > > the contrary.
>
> > > I would agree with you that this could get overused in places (e.g. if it
> > > were used as "syntactic sugar") - but that is a different story.
>
> > > cvs reader and writer - I had trouble (had to "hack" a fix) with this in
> > the
> > > registration system; I never provided a patch, because could not see a
> > > good, clean way to decouple application setup from gluon --- THIS is a
> > way
> > > to do that.
>
> > > I'm pretty sure if I looked, I'd find a few (not many maybe, but a few)
> > > places this would be a good idea, solve existing problems.
>
> > > I think both of you need to just consider this a little more carefully,
> > > that's all...
>
> > > - Yarko
>
> > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 7:00 PM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > I agree with Joe. It require making object context dependent whoch
> > > > would make things unnecessarily more complex and slower.
>
> > > > On Jul 13, 6:42 pm, Joe Barnhart <joe.barnh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I see no benefit to using PEP343 just to provide syntactic sugar for
> > > > > this purpose. There is no REASON to use the "with" statement because
> > > > > we're not doing anything with exception handling here. It's only
> > > > > being used to create an input format that looks prettier to some
> > eyes.
>
> > > > > Am I missing something??
>
> > > > > On Jul 13, 2:40 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > There are 2 interesting aspects from Luis's blogger post:
>
> > > > > > - to use with, classes need to consider contexts;
> > > > > > - the (to me, at least) interesting example of ASP.NET's xmlwriter
> > > > class
> > > > > > (generating SVG dynamically) is... .NET specific; I'm off busy
> > looking
> > > > for
> > > > > > a python portable idiom to use in place of his last example...
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py Web Framework" group.
To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
