Hmm, yea I had not thought of how it would look - I had thought formost of
not needing to necessarily learn about bitsets.when learning about passing
a large number of optional flags to a function.
Although the default could be None, interpreted as an empty set of zero
values.; a set of one or more enums does use more characters compared to
or-ing flags...
On Sunday, 31 December 2017 05:34:23 UTC, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Franklin? Lee <leewangzh...@gmail.com
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>
>> Paddy might want something like this:
>> - For existing APIs which take int or IntFlag flags, allow them to
>> also take a set (or perhaps any collection) of flags.
>> - In new APIs, take sets of Enum flags, and don't make them IntFlag.
>> - Documentation should show preference toward using sets of Enum
>> flags. Tutorials should pass sets.
>
>
> I'm not keen on this recommendation. An argument that takes a Set[Foo]
> would mean that in order to specify:
> - no flags: you'd have to pass set() -- you can't use {} since that's an
> empty dict, not an empty set
> - one flag: you'd have to pass {Foo.BAR} rather than just Foo.BAR
> - two flags: you'd have to pass {Foo.BAR, Foo.BAZ} rather than Foo.BAR |
> Foo.BAZ
>
> I think for each of these the proposal would be strictly worse than the
> current convention.
>
> --
> --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/
