On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 10:13 PM Kyle Stanley <aeros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dominik Vilsmeier wrote: > > I'm not sure if this is doable from the compiler perspective, but what > > about allowing tuples after `**` unpacking: > > > > requests.post(url, **(data, params)) > > > > # similar to > > requests.post(url, data=data, params=params) > > +1. I can see the practical utility of the feature, but was strongly > against the > other syntax proposals so far. IMO, the above alternative does a great job > of > using an existing feature, and I think it would be rather easy to explain > how > it works. > If we go in that direction, I'd prefer curly braces instead so that it's more reminiscient of a dict instead of a tuple, although technically it will look like a set literal. Some other possible syntaxes for a dict (which would have to be unpacked in a function call) with string keys equal to the variable name, i.e. {"foo": foo, "bar": bar}: {*, foo, bar} {**, foo, bar} {:, foo, bar} {{ foo, bar }} {* foo, bar *} {: foo, bar :} {: foo, bar} Personally in these cases I usually write dict(foo=foo, bar=bar) instead of a dict literal because I don't like the quotes, but even then I'm sad that I have to write the word 'dict'. So I would prefer that we covered raw dicts rather than function calls, or both.
_______________________________________________ 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/SATYP4EW2ONMA4TFVFLWNILHTBWU3TNG/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/