'with' statement in python ?

[Steve Holden]

[posted & mailed]

"Guido van Rossum" <guido at python.org> wrote ...
> "Steve Holden" <sholden at holdenweb.com> writes:
>
> > I'm beginning to suffer from a PEPtic ulcer. The "PEP scepticism" thread
has
> > been ploughing on (in my opinion with the only progress being a better
> > understanding of various individuals' and groups' positions) for quite
some
> > time now, without too many people standing up and volunteeering to
improve
> > things.
>
> Nevertheless, that thread implicitly explains one of the good reasons
> why Python doesn't have a 'with' statement: we have to be very careful
> with adding new features, because many folks appreciate Pythonr
> precisely because of its relative feature sparsity.
>
I'm well aware of the good reasons there's not "with" statement. After all,
I *did* add the FAQ entry ... and I do like the language as lean as
possible.

[ ... more 'with' ...]
>
> > I do, of course, have my own opinions about where PythonLabs should be
> > spending its time improving things, but I by and large try to keep these
> > opinions to myself as I'm not in a position to contribute to many of
these
> > activities.
>
> I would like to hear what's important to you!  I get irritated when
> people say "PythonLabs should do this or that" (only Digital Creations
> can tell us what we *should* do, since they pay us), but I *do* want
> to know what kind of things people need.
>
Indeed. It's been a pleasant surprise to see your name on so many c.l.py
postings recently, and I know many readers appreciate your occasional forays
into the high-volume public forum. Compared with, say, certain large
companies in Redmond I think the Python core developers (not just
PythonLabs, even though some forget that) are approachable and responsive.
The wish to retain that advantage is one of the reasons I try not to add to
the wish list until I'm in a position to help.

[ ... ]
>
> > So, I tend to restrict my activities to the practical things I *can* do
to
> > help, like maintaining the FAQ (even though many questions indicate that
a
> > large proportion of newbies either aren't aware of it or don't read it).
[ ... ] The
> > post you responded to, by the way, was simply to indicate that I had
changed
> > the FAQ in line with a previous poster's suggestion.
>
> Ah, the FAQ.  Only the bible has more information that was once useful
> but is now just confusing.  I would love to see its maintenance being
> picked up -- but it takes more than adding an entry explaining the
> lack with statement (thanks, BTW).
>
No problem. I agree the FAQ is in radical need of a revision, and may well
step up to bat in the future. I understand a part of the problem still rests
with domain registrations and site control. Would it be practical to "suck
and parse" to create an alternative, perhaps under some other domain, which
could be more actively maintained?

> > A practical step, which some groups already use, is to publicize the FAQ
and
> > the charter of the newsgroup periodically. [ ... ]
>
> Yeah, I've seen those posts in other groups.  Everybody seems to
> ignore them.  Let's put the good info on the website, that's where
> newbies should go.
>
A good idea. Though the FAQ MoinMoin doesn't seem to get much attention
either. But, overall, I think it is best to have the information available
on the web. So much of what's on there now seems to relate to history rather
than the present. Roll on, Zope ... it must be hard to bring the web site on
to your list of priorities, however.

> > The PEP process is a good idea, but not enough people are willing to get
> > involved. Perhaps some feel they aren't knowledgable enough, others
would
> > rather make their comments on c.l.py. Since I don't have the time myself
> > (yet) to write PEPs, I try to refrain from throwing rocks at those who
have,
> > since at least they have stood up to be counted. So I offer opinions,
but
> > when changes go against my inclination I try not to bitch and moan.
>
> Comments on c.l.py rarely reach me...  If you want my attention,
> propose a PEP.
>
Well, yes. When I have time, when I have  time (the mantra of the working
programmer).

> > Except I still don't like "print >>" ;^)
>
> You don't have to like it, as logn as you use it when appropriate. ;-)
>
I do.

[sigs]

Thanks for your response. Keep the good stuff coming. Overall I think
increased community involvement is the ultimate solution. There seems to be
a movement that way just now, let's hope it retains its impetus.

regards
 Steve
--
http://www.holdenweb.com/