Paul Rubin wrote:
> James Stroud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>Probably, with good code, block scope would be overkill, except that I
>>would welcome list comprehensions to have a new scope:
>
>
> Block scope is a win because it gets rid of the uncertainty of whether
> the variable is used outside the block or not.
In a language with few declarations, it's probably best not to
have too many different nested scopes. Python has a reasonable
compromise in this area. Functions and classes have a scope, but
"if" and "for" do not. That works adequately.
Javascript got it wrong. They have declarations, but the default,
in the absence of a declaration, is global, not local or an error.
Bad design. It's a result of retrofitting declarations to a language,
which usually has painful aftereffects.
John Nagle
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
