On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 12:19 AM Christopher Barker <python...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I may get a chance to look carefully at this in a bit, but for now: > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 6:38 PM Ricky Teachey <ri...@teachey.org> wrote: > >> Sorry for all the replies but I'm honestly very unsure how do this >> correctly under Steven's proposal. >> > > That's OK. It's going to be tricky, and keeping backward compatibility > makes that necessary. > I really appreciate that thanks. Good to know this is a hard thing it's ok to struggle with. But that's all OK, as the number of people that need to write these methods > is small, and the number of people that can use the feature is large. > > -CHB > A point I haven't seen stated elsewhere yet so I'll state it: shouldn't we expect the number of people wanting to write them to go up quite a bit once the subscript syntax becomes more flexible/capable/expressive with the addition of kwargs, and it becomes pretty obvious that function-like subscript calls are now possible... Perhaps they might even appear by many to be encouraged.
_______________________________________________ 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/6FGEJNSHEG5NOT7WRZN5WCS6KYQGLYKY/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
