On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 7:13 PM Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018, at 17:14, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > On Oct 9, 2018, at 16:21, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 10:26:50AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > >> My feeling is that limiting it to strings is fine, but checking those > > >> strings for resembling identifiers is pointless and wasteful. > > > > > > Sure. The question is, do we have to support uses where people > > > intentionally smuggle non-identifier strings as keys via **kwargs? > > > > I would not be in favor of that. I think it doesn’t make sense to be > > able to smuggle those in via **kwargs when it’s not supported by > > Python’s grammar/syntax. > > Can anyone think of a situation where it would be advantageous for an > implementation to reject non-identifier string kwargs? I can't.
One possibility is that it could foreclose certain security bugs from happening. For example, if someone has an API that accepts **kwargs, they might have the mistaken assumption that the keys are identifiers without special characters like ";" etc, and so they could make the mistake of thinking they don't need to escape / sanitize them. --Chris > > I agree with Guido—banning it would be too much trouble for no benefit. > _______________________________________________ > 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/chris.jerdonek%40gmail.com _______________________________________________ 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
