Paul Moore wrote: > > This is my impression, as well. It seems like something that's helpful > in dealing with unstructured object hierarchies with lots of optional > attributes - which is where JSON tends to be used. > > But given that, I'm really much more interested in seeing the new > operators compared against a well-written "JSON object hierarchy > traversal" library than against raw Python code. >
Good point, I did not think about that when suggesting to give some context, but indeed if it's linked to a library in particular, there is always the possibility to choose another object than None as the "nothing here" marker. One that will absorb getitems and getattr accesses so that ?. and ?[] behavior is reproduced by plain . and []. Guard/NoValues should be chosen so that typical lib use is easier. Anyway, addressing partially-populated nodes would need lib support: None-coalescence will not help when you traverse a dict/attribute hierarchy where some nodes implement some attributes/keys but not others. It help only when a node is either regular, or a guard object without any attributes...So an irregular tree, but not too irregular ;-)...
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
