[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 tail wagging the dog. Besides, I had thought that one of the goals of AST was to make it easier to experiment with language. Are you finding that it has a hard time even with the existing grammar? AFAICT, nested tuple arguments presented no problem for Jython or PyPy. > Plus I don't think they are used very much (gut feeling, though, and > not based on any grepping). python-dev grammar change proposals should probably be held to a higher standard than "gut feeling, just toss it" whims. [Nick] > The fixes needed to make them work properly didn't seem all that ugly to > me. That pretty much settles it the "do it for the convenience of AST" argument. [Andrew Bennetts] > Please keep them! Twisted code uses them in places for Deferred > callbacks that need to deal with multiple return values. And that settles the question of whether people are using them in real code. Raymond _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
