Re: (not) handling new programming idioms with grace

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> I think it's a fair argument.  Users will forget to put the proper
> qualifier on the variable, which will result in subtly wrong runtime
> behavior.  It reminds me of the async/await implementation in Python.
> Apparently if you forget to qualify your async function call with the await
> keyword, Python will just happily do nothing (since async functions simply
> return a coroutine).
> 
> In my old post, I actually argue for "with .. as" over a new type of
> local.  That control structure seems well-proven at this point, there are
> so many use cases.  I don't know if there's some collective ego here about
> "doing something like Python", but it would be a shame to not consider it
> seriously.

I did not get your point here. Why a user that would forget to properly
qualify its 'local' would not forget to use 'with'? What are the
differences between 'local scoped' vs 'with' except the syntax?

-- Roberto