> Bear in mind that these last ones are exactly equivalent to the "or" > operator, as they'll use the default if you have any falsy value. > variable = some_function(...) or []
Isn't that in itself a good argument in favor of (??) ? By missing to add 'is None', I would have already added a subtle bug that could be quite difficult to find. (??) could prevent that while also being more readable. > I'm actually more interested in a better idiom for non-constant > function default arguments, since that's the place where this kind of > thing often comes up. A nice ??= operator might help if your default > is None, but if you then change the default to be object(), you can't > use ??= any more. [...] True, but from my experience 'None' is just by far the most common default. Why not improve how we handle it? _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/VDMN5ZHPMMBLCHVM63RROZJYAIII74A3/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
