On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 at 22:27, Greg Ewing <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > > On 2/12/21 4:40 am, Paul Moore wrote: > > the > > intended use is that people must supply a list[int] or not supply the > > argument *at all*. > > I don't think this is a style of API that we should be encouraging > people to create, because it results in things that are very > awkward to wrap.
Hmm, interesting point, I agree with you. It's particularly telling that I got sucked into designing that sort of API, even though I know it's got this problem. I guess that counts as an argument against the late bound defaults proposal - or maybe even two: 1. It's hard (if not impossible) to wrap functions that use late-bound defaults. 2. The feature encourages people to write such unwrappable functions when an alternative formulation that is wrappable is just as good. (That may actually only be one point - obviously a feature encourages people to use it, and any feature can be over-used. But the point about wrappability stands). Paul _______________________________________________ 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/HMQVEXZSUWGJSXNGGSDKVBDWNF5PYMUX/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
