I'm seeing enough different interpretations to think things aren't quite
specified -- but I'm not sure if it matters.
(1) Is any of this something that should affect computation, or is it really
just a question of how to interpret possibly ambiguous documentation?
(2) Are any of these troubling cases something that a person should actually
write for a normal situation? Or are they just arguments about which
abbreviations are acceptable? Or about how automatically-generated (inferred)
type descriptions should be written?
(3) Are the slice-expansion questions all assumed to be indexing an
n-dimensional array, as opposed to [start, stop, step]? Is that explicit in
the PEP, and just not in the extracts here?
(4) Expanding multiple * shouldn't be ambiguous; the problem is figuring out
what to condense into which if two are adjacent. So
s1, s2 =[a,b], (1,2,3)
[*s1, *s2] should turn into [a, b, 1, 2, 3]
The problem is that
[*s3, *s4] = (a, b, 1, 2, 3)
is ambiguous ... and I didn't really get that distinction from Petr's question
or the answers. I can't tell whether I've missed something crucial, or others
are arguing over angels on a pinhead ... so whatever the PEP ends up deciding,
it should be explicit. (I *think* the earlier parts of this thread are
consistent with this, and discussing whether to say explicitly that certain
formats are forbidden (but maybe not enforced by the grammar), meaningless, or
valid but currently meaningless outside of typing.)
-jJ
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/YH4URO5EDQODG4QMGOCSXHV6RYTMLK5M/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
