code blocks in Python

[John Roth]

news:8ef9bea6.0311242041.92f108a at posting.google.com...
> "John Roth" <newsgroups at jhrothjr.com> wrote in message
news:<vs56mue8hmdob1 at news.supernews.com>...
> > I'm probably representative. If you don't manage a compelling
> > case for why dynamic binding is a useful option, then you're not going
> > to get anywhere with this proposal.
>
> Wow, I did not even know there was a proposal. :)
>
> I thought the purpose of my message was to find out whether there have
> been previous attempts. I still have not gotten an answer, and I see
> already lots of fire. For no good reason.
>
> As I have said, I refuse to believe I am the first person to bring up
> this topic. Because it seems such a simple issue, such a simple
> feature. (Bear in mind that the compile() function exists since a long
> long time ago.) So, I am prepared to listen to experts comment on why
> everything is wrong and un-doable, and that the topic has been covered
> many times before and is dead since a long time ago. So that I can
> simply stop. Yet, I have heard none to the effect.

Try Google Groups.

>
> ------------------
>
> Like someone said once about metaclasses: if you need to ask if you
> need to use metaclasses, the answer is "you don't". Same thing with
> metaprogramming. If you need to ask whether you need metaprogramming,
> the answer is: "you don't". People that get into metaclasses and
> metaprogramming know what they want to do.
>
> If you have really read and digested my comment about thinking first
> on compile() function and post later, you wouldn't have posted your
> message.

Rudeness objection. You're mind reading. You have  no
idea what I'm thinking, or what my background is.

>
> There are two issues here:
>
> (1) The usefulness of meta-programming.
> (2) Codeblock feature.
>
> You are asking the question about (1), not (2). My impression is that
> you have no experience using compile() function, nor general idea
> about metaprogramming. (Feel free to correct me.) But you decide to
> use it as an argument to attack (2) anyway, instead of (1). Your
> firepower is misplaced, and causes only colateral damages.

Rudeness objection. What I know or don't know isn't of issue.
Since you said you don't have a clear use case, my participation
in this discussion is ended.

John Roth