Hi Vincent, Your idea is interesting but we are worried that there are not enough real use cases where it would be useful. Have you encountered situations yourself where this would make a difference? I am asking not for clarifying examples (you already provided one and from that it's perfectly clear to me what you are proposing) but for real-world code that would benefit from this addition to the itemgetter API.
--Guido On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Vincent Maillol <vincent.mail...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > Our PEP idea would be to purpose to add a global default value for > itemgeet and attrgetter method. > > This was inspired from bug 14384 (https://bugs.python.org/issue14384); > opened by Miki TEBEKA. > > For example, we could do: > > p1 = {'x': 43; 'y': 55} > x, y, z = itemgetter('x', 'y', 'z', default=0)(values) > print(x, y, z) > 43, 55, 0 > > instead of: > > values = {'x': 43; 'y': 55} > x = values.get('x', 0) > y = values.get('y', 0) > z = values.get('z', 0) > print(x, y, z) > 43, 55, 0 > > The goal is to have have concise code and improve consistency with > getattr, attrgetter and itemgetter > > What are you thinking about this? > > MAILLOL Vincent > GALODE Alexandre > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list > Python-ideas@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
