Please move this subtopic to a subject that doesn’t have “PEP 622” in its
topic.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 17:54 Greg Ewing wrote:
> On 8/07/20 5:30 am, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> > from __future__ import const
> >
> > FOO: const = 1
> >
> > match val:
> > case FOO: # obviously matches by const
On 8/07/20 5:30 am, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
from __future__ import const
FOO: const = 1
match val:
case FOO: # obviously matches by constant's value
This would make it *more* difficult to distinguish constants from
assignment targets when looking at the match statement, unless you
choose
On 8/07/20 2:31 am, Henk-Jaap Wagenaar wrote:
Would it be possible here to use a syntax/symbol that is illegal instead
of _? I think this has been mooted but my favourite (so far) would be
"?" so you have "case ?:" and "Point(?, ?)".
Would ?name then work instead of ".name" as well?
It would
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 18:35, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 9:09 AM Paul Moore wrote:
>>
>> Hopefully the PEP authors intend to post an updated version
>> (preferably with a summary of changes, for people struggling to keep
>> up with the traffic here!) sometime soon.
>
>
> Pl
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 9:09 AM Paul Moore wrote:
> Hopefully the PEP authors intend to post an updated version
> (preferably with a summary of changes, for people struggling to keep
> up with the traffic here!) sometime soon.
>
Please consider that the PEP authors also are struggling with the tr
Hello,
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:22:28 +0100
Henk-Jaap Wagenaar wrote:
[]
> > >> I don't like the .name syntax (grit on Tim's monitor; does
[]
> "PEP 622: Ditch leading dots for name loads": this is now an
> ex-syntax, it is bereft of life (for this, draft, of the PEP, might
> come back late
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:04, Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev <
python-dev@python.org> wrote:
> I don't like the .name syntax (grit on Tim's monitor; does not
>> suggest the meaning). [...] But I don't know what syntax (where
>> necessary) to suggest.
>
>
https://photos.app.goo.gl/xN68s3QMMBTPTLD47
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 17:09, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:40, Henk-Jaap Wagenaar
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:04, Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev <
> python-dev@python.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't like the .name syntax (grit on Tim's monitor; does not
> >> suggest th
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 8:37 AM Rhodri James wrote:
> I'm not quite convinced about making "_" non-binding, mostly because of
> the knock-on effects in the PEP for other types of patterns. It seems
> to breed more special cases, and I can't help but feel that's a bad sign.
>
After spending some
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:40, Henk-Jaap Wagenaar
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:04, Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't like the .name syntax (grit on Tim's monitor; does not
>> suggest the meaning). [...] But I don't know what syntax (where necessary)
>> to suggest.
>
>
>
On 07/07/2020 15:31, Henk-Jaap Wagenaar wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:04, Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev <
python-dev@python.org> wrote:
I'm not keen on special treatment of the '_' variable, and would
prefer to be able to use 'else:' after 'match'.
I used to be in this "camp", however, a
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:04, Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev <
python-dev@python.org> wrote:
> I don't like the .name syntax (grit on Tim's monitor; does not
> suggest the meaning). [...] But I don't know what syntax (where necessary)
> to suggest.
+1(000)
> I'm not keen on special treatme
12 matches
Mail list logo
