On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 10:15 AM Stephen J. Turnbull < turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
> Alex Hall writes: > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 5:00 PM Stephen J. Turnbull < > > turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote: > > > > > If the "keyword arguments in __getitem__" feature is added, .get() is > > > purely redundant. (Of course this thread would then become "make > > > 'default' a standard keyword argument for mutable collections.") > > > > > > > Is that something people want to do? Do people want to be able to > > write `my_dict[key, default=0]` instead of `my_dict.get(key, 0)`? > > What about `my_dict[key, default=None]` instead of `my_dict.get(key)`? > > Of course they don't want to do that. Of course dict.get is going > nowhere. Of course that's redundant. Of course if collections get a > standard 'default' for __getitem__, many people *will* start writing > `my_dict[key, default=None]`, if only because they don't read enough > docs to know about dict.get. > OK, I'll try again. Do people want collections to get a standard 'default' for `__getitem__`? I don't want mappings to grow a second way to do the same thing, and I don't want sequences to have a different way to do it from mappings.
_______________________________________________ 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/4QYQNSNUIJ2WRFHTRZKUM2I527CGD7OU/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
