On Tue, Dec 3, 2019, at 13:43, Brett Cannon wrote: > -1 from me. I can see someone not realizing an operator was changed, > assuming it's standard semantics, and then having things break subtly. > And debugging this wouldn't be fun either. To me this is monkeypatching > without an explicit need for it, i.e. if you really want different > semantics in your module then define a function and use that instead of > influence-at-a-distance overriding of syntax.
Does it make a difference that it'd only apply to code that is physically in the same module where the function is defined? I'd originally planned to suggest full lexical scope for the lookup, in fact, so you could in theory do it within a single function. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/CDXXFLM633TQLKKLXFNSU3YZLCGUODW6/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
