Richard Damon writes:

 > I thought _ was also commonly used as:
 > 
 > first, -, last = (1, 2, 3)
 > 
 > as a generic don't care about assignment.

It is.  But there are other options (eg, 'ignored') if '_' is used for
translation in the same scope.

 > I guess since the above will create a local, so not overwrite a
 > 'global' function _ for translations, so the above usage works as
 > long as that function (or whatever namespace you are in) doesn't
 > use _ for translations.

Exactly.

 > As long as the bindings in match also make the symbol a local
 > (which seems reasonable) then you would get a similar restriction.

It's quite different.  First, it surely won't make other symbols
match-local.  Of course there will be times when you do all the work
inside the match statement.  But often you'll want to do bindings in a
match statement, then use those outside.  The second problem is that
this use of '_' isn't optional.  It's part of the syntax.  That means
that you can't use the traditional marking of a translateable string
(and it's not just tradition; there is a lot of external software that
expects it) in that scope.

So it's practically important, if not theoretically necessary, that
'case _' not bind '_'.

Steve
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6SDEJKTXJE4HS5CM2HIGB3ZYS5IN2BAZ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to