Simplistic block scope - a syntactic sugar

[gh-user-2022]

@MegaIng

If you already found these obviously close related proposals, please

• link to them
• point out how your proposal is different
• argue against the points made in those threads.

Otherwise all you are doing is wasting other peoples time to retread the exact same discussions made before.

This is a valid concern, thank you for pointing out.

Among the links you provided there are following ideas:

1. Should loops be in their own scope? [poll]
   It is different from what I posted here. It is specific to loops. It also has its own topics of discussion, e.g. making it backwards compatible.
2. Lack of block scope
   This one discusses different syntax. It proposes making blocks inside constructions like if/else, while/for scoped. That specific discussion was destined to end up fruitless, because the syntax was confusing and not backwards compatible.
3. Ad-hoc scoping to organize code (see also PEP 359)
   This one is different from what I posted. Namespaces is separate from block scoping and a large topic on its own. The rationale is also different.