On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 11:30:17PM +0200, Alex Hall wrote:
> Specifically the PEP says:
>
> > Another proposed idiom, per-module shadowing of the built-in zip with some
> > subtly different variant from itertools, is an anti-pattern that shouldn't
> > be encouraged.
> >
>
> I think the PEP is saying it'd be an antipattern to shadow zip with a
> version that is always strict. If you want both strict and non-strict in
> the same file, you're in trouble.
Then don't do it!
If you want both, then it is trivially easy to use both:
from itertools import zip_equal
zip(zip_equal(a, b), c)
> But replacing zip with a zip that has an
> optional strict flag should be harmless.
[Aside: I still disagree *strongly* with the use of a "strict" flag
here.]
Indeed, that's a perfectly safe and fine use of shadowing. Python is
designed to allow shadowing. Calling it an "anti-pattern" is just wrong.
Yes, shadowing can be abused, or done by accident, but intentional
shadowing is a useful software design pattern. For instance:
if not settings['print_diagnostics']:
print = lambda *args, **kw: None
def main():
print('diagnostics go here')
...
--
Steven
_______________________________________________
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/N54HB2OTJP2TBRR5UZYBYZ4Z4JNYDYDO/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
