On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 20:47, Rhodri James <rho...@kynesim.co.uk> wrote: > > On 18/02/2020 20:33, Soni L. wrote: > > > > > > On 2020-02-18 5:08 p.m., Rhodri James wrote: > >> On 18/02/2020 19:43, Soni L. wrote: > >>> It'd be nice to have a __valid_getitem_requests__ protocol that, if > >>> present, yields pairs such that: > >>> > >>> for key, value in items(obj): > >>> assert obj[key] == value > >>> > >>> for any obj. > >> > >> OK, I'll bite. What is this "items()" function you apply to the > >> arbitrary object? > >> > > Similar to len(). Just a shitty wrapper for __valid_getitem_requests__. > > Language, sunshine. > > Do you have a use case for this, or is it just theoretically nice to > have? I have to say it isn't nice enough for me to actually want it, > and I say that as someone who regularly forgets that iterating over a > dict gets you its keys.
This looks to me like Lua's `items()` function. It's useful in Lua, but I'm not sure there's any obvious reason to assume it'll be a natural fit for idiomatic Python code. As people have said, do you have a good Python example of real code where this would be useful? (And where dct.items() or enumerate(lst) wouldn't be sufficient - code that expects to work equally with lists or dictionaries seems more Lua-like than Pythonic, IMO). Paul _______________________________________________ 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/RWWNHLGO2ONXHPS56DKGTXNVFJOHPZO2/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
