David Mertz wrote:
> [...] Many of the new syntax ideas COULD be done with an
> arcane function that only needs to be written once (but better than my 15
> minute versions). The fact that such magic functions are not in widespread
> use, to my mind, argues quite strongly against them actually meriting new
> syntax.

People can live without this syntax, the rationale of the proposal ins't that 
users are actively complaining about this and if people aren't expressing 
anything about this issue isn't real reason to rule out an idea.

Type hints may be an example, I guess... We could keep using comments for that 
or other hacks, no new syntax needed. But in order for people who would benefit 
from it to start actually using it to make it as easy as possible was the push 
this feature needed for gaining wider adoption. Correct me if I'm off here 
please.

The proposal intends to allow for better code and to serve as an incentive for 
the widespread use of keyword parameters.

A utility function `Q` won't have high adherence because it is essentially a 
hack and no one wants to install a lib and go importing `Q` in every project 
file. If it's not easy and/or doesn't look nice people won't use it.

This is only my humble opinion though.

Rodrigo Martins de Oliveira
_______________________________________________
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/VRNDZ33ZMHDSWETIOBGIUGJGT4B2MCZL/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to