Or maybe you are not listening to what I am saying.
It would only take effect for arguments, which have default value.
So.
dict().__setitem__(key, NotGiven)
type(NotGiven)
Exception(NotGiven)
getattr(NotGiven, name)
Ok, maybe there are some crucial functions, which have argument defaults. But
On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 14:08, Dom Grigonis wrote:
>
> IT IS AN OBJECT. Never said otherwise.
One that you can't do any of the operations I described. There is no
way to use it as an object.
> `inspect.getcallargs` can seemingly be modified for such behaviour. I just
> wrote a decorator, which
IT IS AN OBJECT. Never said otherwise.
`inspect.getcallargs` can seemingly be modified for such behaviour. I just
wrote a decorator, which does what I proposed using `inspect` module for a
chosen sentinel value. The issue is that it would be a bottleneck if used on
any callable, which is
On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 12:20, Dom Grigonis wrote:
>
>
> > There is no way to have a value that isn't a value, in Python. The
> > concept doesn't make sense and would break all kinds of things.
> > (That's why, when a special function like __getitem__ has to be able
> > to return literally
> There is no way to have a value that isn't a value, in Python. The
> concept doesn't make sense and would break all kinds of things.
> (That's why, when a special function like __getitem__ has to be able
> to return literally anything, it signals "nothing to return" by
> raising an exception.)
On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 09:15, Dom Grigonis wrote:
> This works ok:
>
> ```
> def foo(bar=None):
> if bar is None:
> bar = A()
>
> class A:
> pass
> ```
>
> If PEP is aiming to replace the latter example, then it would be great if it
> kept all of its advantages. I.e. not having
1. Not if it is exactly as described in PEP.
2. No.
3. -
4. Couple of points here. One check and one orthogonal idea, which would make
this PEP very attractive to me.
I would definitely like use this functionality if both of below points were
satisfied/achievable. If any of those weren't
