New PEP: The directive statement

[Aahz Maruch]

In article <yHPt6.2553$4N4.334967 at newsc.telia.net>,
Fredrik Lundh <fredrik at effbot.org> wrote:
>Martin von Loewis wrote:
>>
>> That is also why the PEP 236 proposal (__future__ imports) finds that
>> much resistance it uses an action statement to declare things.
>
>except that "import" already is a declaration statement, of course.

Depends how you define "already".  There is no current released version
of Python (alphas and betas do not count as "released versions") in
which "import" is a declaration.  Moreover, making "import" into both an
action statement and a declaration has some obvious warts about it.

I'm still not entirely sure that I think this directive idea is better,
but let's address it on its merits and not throw in the bogeyman of
compatibility issues.

>> P.S. If "directive transitional nested_scopes" is approved
>
>well, adding new, ugly, and utterly non-pythonic syntax for a one-
>shot workaround strikes me as a really bad thing.  if I want Tcl
>(random interpretation of barewords) or applescript (lame attemts
>to make things look like english), I know where to find it.

So you're saying that "from __future__" is only to be used for this one
issue of nested scopes?  I don't think so....
-- 
                      --- Aahz  <*>  (Copyright 2001 by aahz at pobox.com)

Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista   http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"I won't accept a model of the universe in which free will, omniscient
gods, and atheism are simultaneously true."  -- M