Brett Cannon wrote:
Would anyone really throw a huge fit if they went away? I am willing
to write a PEP for their removal in 2.6 with a deprecation in 2.5 if
people are up for it.
-1. I don't think this could realistically be done before 3.0,
because it would break a lot of existing code for
test__locale still fails for me on Mac OS X 10.3.9. This is on both the 2.4
branch and HEAD. Does it succeed for anyone on 10.4? If not, perhaps we
should list that as an expected failure on that platform?
Skip
___
Python-Dev mailing list
* Brett Cannon:
Is anyone truly attached to nested tuple function parameters; ``def
fxn((a,b)): print a,b``? At one of the PyCon sprints Guido seemed
okay with just having them removed when Jeremy asked about ditching
them thanks to the pain they caused in the AST branch.
Will
def
[forgot to CC python-dev]
On 9/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
test__locale still fails for me on Mac OS X 10.3.9. This is on both the 2.4
branch and HEAD. Does it succeed for anyone on 10.4? If not, perhaps we
should list that as an expected failure on that platform?
Brett Cannon wrote:
Is anyone truly attached to nested tuple function parameters; ``def
fxn((a,b)): print a,b``? At one of the PyCon sprints Guido seemed
okay with just having them removed when Jeremy asked about ditching
them thanks to the pain they caused in the AST branch. I personally
[Brett]
Is anyone truly attached to nested tuple function parameters; ``def
fxn((a,b)): print a,b``?
I am.
ditching them thanks to the pain they caused in the AST branch.
Changing the grammar for the convenience of a particular AST
implementation carries zero weight with me -- that is the
[Brett]
Is anyone truly attached to nested tuple function parameters; ``def
fxn((a,b)): print a,b``?
[Raymond]
I am.
I agree that we shouldn't mess with them in 2.x. Yet I think they are
a candidate for being dropped from Py3K. While every feature is used
by *someone* (as the feedback to
Hi, has anybody considered adding something like this:
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x', *a, 'y']
as syntactic sugar for
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x' ] + a + [ 'y' ].
Notes:
- This is a common operation
- To me, the splicing form looks much better than the
concatenation form
- It can be implemented more
Karl Chen wrote:
Hi, has anybody considered adding something like this:
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x', *a, 'y']
as syntactic sugar for
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x' ] + a + [ 'y' ].
Notes:
- This is a common operation
is it?
/F
___
Python-Dev
Karl Chen wrote:
Hi, has anybody considered adding something like this:
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x', *a, 'y']
as syntactic sugar for
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x' ] + a + [ 'y' ].
You can write that as
a = [1, 2]
a[1:1] = a
Greg
___
Python-Dev
François Pinard wrote:
The only practical reason to like this feature is sparing the need of
finding an otherwise useless name for the formal argument.
If the argument represents a coherent enough concept
to be passed in as a tuple in the first place, it
should be possible to find a meaningful
Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Karl Chen wrote:
Hi, has anybody considered adding something like this:
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x', *a, 'y']
as syntactic sugar for
a = [1, 2]
[ 'x' ] + a + [ 'y' ].
Notes:
- This is a common operation
is it?
Not in the
12 matches
Mail list logo
