On 26 April 2018 at 16:18, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 11:13 PM, Martin Teichmann > <lkb.teichm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi list, > > > > when reading PEP 572 I actually liked it a lot - I think it's actually > > a cool idea. I think it's actually that cool an idea that it should be > > made the default way of doing an assignment, over time phasing out the > > good ole =. > > > > This would have several benefits: > > > > - people wouldn't have to worry about two different options > > - different things would have a different look: assignment is :=, > > keyword args is =, while comparison is ==. Especially beginners would > > benefit from this clarity. > > > > in this case, for sure, we should make it possible to chain :=s, for > > example by making it bind right-to-left, so that a := b := 3 would be > > a := (b := 3) > > > > I'm sorry if somebody brought that up already, but the discussion has > > grown so huge that I couldn't read through it entirely. > > It has indeed grown huge. And in the interests of not growing it even > huger, I'm not going to rehash the arguments against making := into > the one and only operator, save to say one thing: there's no way that > "x = 1" can be removed from the language any time soon, and by "soon" > I mean even by the Yes Prime Minister definition, where "any day now", > in strategic terms, meant "within the next half century". >
In the interest of that, do you think := can be made illegal, by the grammar, if used outside an expression? a = 1 # legal a := 1 # Syntax error if a := 1: # legal Thanks in advance. -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro Gambit Research "The universe is always one step beyond logic." -- Frank Herbert
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
