On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 at 01:38, Rob Cliffe via Python-list <[email protected]> wrote: > Chris, please can you be more helpful? > If I said "I think it's possible to square the circle with compass and > straight-edge" > and you replied "Try it; it won't work" > you would be correct, but I might waste a lifetime trying.
Several, in fact. That wasn't finally proven impossible until the late 1800s. > How much more helpful to explain *why* it won't work. > So if you know of one or more things that would break if walrus targets > were unrestricted, > please spell (one of more of) them out. > If you don't actually know of any such, you re just whistling in the wind. We looked into this YEARS ago. Do you expect me to remember everything that went wrong, just to save you the trouble of building CPython from source? I think you're the one being unhelpful here (or lazy, same difference). You want me to feed you all of the information you want, despite the grammar files being right there ready for you to try. Why should I go and do it all again just for you? For a very brief summary: Conflicts. There are conflicts. A fully-generic assignment target is EXTREMELY broad. But okay. Let's say I'm just whistling in the wind. Fine! I can simply stop responding to you, and then what? You get to feel righteous about how we were totally wrong to put the restriction on it. Is that your goal here? To feel superior, without actually having any evidence? ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/python-list.python.org
