On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 7:26 PM Stefano Borini <stefano.bor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > QUESTION > > Suppose we have > > >>> d[x=1, y=2] = 42 > > >>> d[x=1, y=2] > > 42 > > where d is an instance of a suitable class X that has no special > knowledge of keywords. > > Initially, when I wrote the pep, the idea was that there was no > distinction of kwargs and normal args. Basically the idea was that > currently the only "metainfo" associated to every argument is purely > positional (e.g. the meaning of position 1 is implicit). But index 1 > can have a specific semantic meaning (e.g. it could be a day). > So in practice they would be one and the same, just that you add > non-positional semantic meaning to indexes, and you can refer to them > either through the position, or this additional semantic meaning. > > In other words, if you claim that the first index is day, and the > second index is detector, somehow, there is no difference between > these > > d[3, 4] > d[day=3, detector=4] > d[detector=4, day=3] > > In fact, my initial feeling would be that you can use either one or > the other. You should not be able to mix and match. > > the pep went through various revisions, and we came to a possible > proposal, but it's not set in stone. > This would definitely not be sufficient for xarray, which I see as being one of the main users of this syntax. The whole point is to be able to specify an arbitrary subset labeled dimensions.
_______________________________________________ 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/SJU4YXHOU27CIKPGDKIDJ6EB3H4XR253/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
