Home Original page

Goto (Posting On Python-List Prohibited)

Chris Angelico rosuav at gmail.com
Sat Dec 30 15:49:29 EST 2017 
On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 7:36 AM, Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet at bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> bartc <bc at freeuk.com> writes:
>
>> On 30/12/2017 16:53, mm0fmf wrote:
>>> On 30/12/2017 14:41, bartc wrote:
>>>> it looks a bit naff
>>>
>>> Understatement of 2017.
>>
>> I'm honest about my own ideas, but my remarks were about the use of
>> special symbols such as "::" and "@".
>>
>> Before completely dismissing it however, you should look at how
>> another language such as Python can achieve the same thing.
>>
>> Namely, take any block of code within a function, and allow it to be
>> executed or shared from anywhere else in the function, with the
>> minimum of disruption.
>
> That's what a local function does and it does it with the clean
> semantics of a function call.
>

The only downside that I can think of is performance - function calls
can be a bit heavy-weight. I'd be curious to see what a "lightweight
local function" would look like - it could have restrictive semantics
like "can only be called from the function that constructed it" and
then could behave like Bart's proposed "block of code". But I suspect
it wouldn't have all that many uses, compared to a *real* closure,
which can be passed around as its own entity.

ChrisA
More information about the Python-list mailing list