Message195690
As Serhiy's examples show, the ambiguities this introduces get confusing fast. A more constrained version that (for example) permitted only name references for the callable could resolve that, but it's probably still a bad idea. Still, interesting to know it is *technically* possible, if anyone decides to pursue it further :)
The "silently ignores bare print statements" aspect isn't new - Python 3 already behaves that way, since a print on its own line now just references the builtin without calling it. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2013-08-20 14:06:16 | ncoghlan | set | recipients:
+ ncoghlan, gvanrossum, peter.otten, pitrou, ezio.melotti, serhiy.storchaka |
2013-08-20 14:06:16 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1377007576.66.0.3902386563.issue18788@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2013-08-20 14:06:16 | ncoghlan | link | issue18788 messages |
2013-08-20 14:06:16 | ncoghlan | create | |
|