On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15 April 2018 at 19:41, Mikhail V <mikhail...@gmail.com> wrote: >> So IIUC, the *only* reason is to avoid '==' ad '=' similarity? >> If so, then it does not sound convincing at all. >> Of course Python does me a favor showing an error, >> when I make a typo like this: >> if (x = y) >> >> But still, if this is the only real reason, it is not convincing. > > It's thoroughly convincing, because we're already familiar with the > consequences of folks confusing "=" and "==" when writing C & C++ > code. It's an eternal bug magnet, so it's not a design we're ever > going to port over to Python. [...] > The examples in the PEP have been updated to better reflect some of > the key motivating use cases (embedded assignments in if and while > statement conditions, generator expressions, and container > comprehensions)
Im personally "0" on the whole proposal. Just was curious about that "demonisation" of "=" and "==" visual similarity. Granted, writing ":=" instead of "=" helps a little bit. But if the ":=" will be accepted, then we end up with two spellings :-) > >> And as a side note: I personally find the look of ":=" a bit 'noisy'. > > You're not alone in that, which is one of the reasons finding a > keyword based option that's less syntactically ambiguous than "as" > could be an attractive alternative. > Keyword variants look less appealing than ":=". but if it had to be a keyword, then I'd definitely stay by "TARGET keyword EXPR" just not to swap the traditional order. Mikhail _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/