https://github.com/kirbyfan64/_frozensafemockobjectimplementation
In all seriousness, though, I really feel like that would be the ultimate bug magnet, since it'd be easy to forget to un-wrap the object afterwards. -- Ryan [ERROR]: Your autotools build scripts are 200 lines longer than your program. Something’s wrong. http://kirbyfan64.github.io/ On Sep 10, 2016 5:21 PM, "David Mertz" <me...@gnosis.cx> wrote: > I find the '?.' syntax very ugly, much more so in the examples of chained > attributes. > > A much better way to handle the use case is to wrap objects in a class > that gives this "propagating None" behavior with plain attribute access. A > nice implementation was presented in this thread. > > On Sep 10, 2016 3:16 PM, "Random832" <random...@fastmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016, at 13:26, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> > The way I recall it, we arrived at the perfect syntax (using ?) and >> > semantics. The issue was purely strong hesitation about whether >> > sprinkling ? all over your code is too ugly for Python >> >> I think that if there's "strong hesitation" about something being "too >> ugly" it can't really be described as "the perfect syntax". IIRC there >> were a couple alternatives being discussed that would have reduced the >> number of question marks to one [or one per object which might be None]. >> _______________________________________________ >> Python-ideas mailing list >> Python-ideas@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas >> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >> > > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list > Python-ideas@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
