On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> > wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz > > > > wrote: > >> > >> Chris Angelico wrote: > >>> > >>> The problem is that it depends on internal whitespace to > >>> distinguish it from augmented assignment; > >> > >> > >> Ah, didn't spot that. I guess the ellipsis is the next best > >> thing then. > >> > >> An alternative would be to require parens: > >> > >> (x, y, *) = z > > > > > > But that would have the same issue. > > > > Is this problem really important enough that it requires dedicated > syntax? > > Isn't the itertools-based solution good enough? (Or failing that, > couldn't > > we add something to itertools to make it more readable rather than going > > straight to new syntax?) > > I don't think there's much that can be done without syntax; the > biggest problem IMO is that you need to tell islice how many targets > it'll be assigned into. It needs some interpreter support to express > "grab as many as you have targets for, leaving everything else behind" > without stating how many that actually is. So the question is whether > that is sufficiently useful to justify extending the syntax. There are > a number of potential advantages and several competing syntax options, > and this suggestion keeps coming up, so I think a PEP is warranted. > OK, that's reasonable, and at first blush the ellipsis proposal looks okay. My PEP queue for Python 3.7 is full though, so I would like to put this off until 3.8. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
