Hi,
I have two questions about PEP 622, as it stands.
1. Is the current version the final version?
2. Is the difference in semantics between the Django example and the
proposed replacement deliberate or accidental?
(The difference being the change in behaviour for sequences other
than list
On 24/06/2020 20:38, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Everyone,
>
> If you've commented and you're worried you haven't been heard, please=20
> add your issue *concisely* to this new thread. Note that the following=20
> issues are already open and will be responded to separately; please=20
> don't bother
> On 25 Jul 2020, at 03:44, Rob Cliffe wrote:
>
> Without arguing for or against allowing a capture variable, IMO rather
> than syntax like
>match into :
> it would be far better (and not require a new keyword) to write this as
>with as match :
>
> On 24/06/2020 20:38, Guido van
Everyone,
If you've commented and you're worried you haven't been heard, please add
your issue *concisely* to this new thread. Note that the following issues
are already open and will be responded to separately; please don't bother
commenting on these until we've done so:
- Alternative spellings
I'm happy to present a new PEP for the python-dev community to review. This
is joint work with Brandt Bucher, Tobias Kohn, Ivan Levkivskyi and Talin.
Many people have thought about extending Python with a form of pattern
matching similar to that found in Scala, Rust, F#, Haskell and other
