On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 11:32:09AM -0000, Steve Jorgensen wrote: > That leads me to want to change the proposal to say that we give the > same meaning to "_" in ordinary destructuring that it has in > structural pattern matching, and then, I believe that a final "*_" in > the expression on the left would end up with exactly the same meaning > that I originally proposed for the bare "*". > > Although that would be a breaking change, it is already conventional > to use "_" as a variable name only when we specifically don't care > what it contains following its assignment, so for any code to be > affected by the change would be highly unusual.
Not so: it is very common to use `_()` as a function in internationalisation. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3077227/mercurial-python-what-does-the-underscore-function-do If we are bike-shedding symbols for this feature, I am a bit dubious about the asterisk. It already gets used in so many places, and it can be confused for `a, b, *x` with the name x lost. What do people think about first, second, / = items where / stands for "don't advance the iterator"? I like it because it reminds me of the slash in "No Smoking" signs, and similar. As in "No (more) iteration". -- Steve _______________________________________________ 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/B2IIGM5TMC7YWVXHQPD6HKT4IMHHSJDP/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
