On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:10 AM Serhiy Storchaka <storch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 03.12.19 07:04, Guido van Rossum пише:
> > Actually there's no need to optimize the |= operator -- for strings we
> > have to optimize += *because* strings are immutable, but for dicts we
> > would define |= as essentially an alias for .update(), just like the
> > relationship between += and .extend() for lists, and then no unnecessary
> > objects would be created.
>
> Yet one question: should |= accept only dicts at right side, or
> arbitrary mappings with the keys() method, or even iterables of pairs as
> dict.update()?
>
IMO it should follow the example of sets, and accept Mappings but not the
other thing. (If you have the other thing, use update().)
> And the same question for |. Should `{} | Mapping()` and `{} | []` work?
>
Ditto -- {} | Mapping() should work, but {} | [] should not.
Steven, please take note -- these kinds of things should be spelled out in
the PEP (apologies if they are already in there).
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/DIV75M4LRO2M534XM6AUHR67WQWEGI2M/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
