On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 09:25:00PM -0700, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > One question that comes up: should d[**kwargs] be valid syntax? d[*args] > currently is not, but that's OK since d[tuple(args)] is identical.
If we're going to support keyword arguments, what reason would we have for not supporting `**kw` unpacking? > On the other hand, we probably do need d[**kwargs] since there's no way to > dynamically unpack keyword arguments (short of directly calling > __getitem__). Indeed. So there is an excellent reason to support keyword unpacking, and no good reason not to support it. (Assuming keyword args are supported at all.) > And perhaps for symmetry this suggests d[*args] should be > valid, too, defined as equivalent to d[tuple(args)]. Since positional arguments to `__getitem__` are automatically packed into a single argument, there is no need to call it with `*args`. That would be a waste of time: have the interpreter unpack the arguments, then pack them again. As you say, that makes it functionally equivalent to just passing `tuple(args)`. "For symmetry" is at best a weak argument. -- 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/G2DT2PLYHKJ7NI6EKLYJO2WINXPQYDEE/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
