On Mon, Aug 31, 2020, at 02:45, Greg Ewing wrote: > On 31/08/20 3:35 pm, Random832 wrote: > > > x[(1,)] old arg=(1,); new args=((1,),)? > > x[(1,2)] old arg=(1,2); new args=((1,2),)? > > No, I proposed *not* to do those -- putting parens around the > arguments would continue to make no difference, regardless of > which dunder was being called.
What about passing in a tuple object that's in a variable? a=1,2 x[a] should args be ((1,2),) or (1, 2)? Having x[a] be different from x[(1,2)] would be *bizarre*, but having it result in args=(1,2) would be keeping almost as much baggage from the current paradigm as not having a new dunder at all. I think that's why I assumed as a matter of course that a new dunder meant a tuple argument would unambiguously become a single argument. _______________________________________________ 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/7ZQRK6Y6Y6HVNB6PI7PQQBAF35NGT6PP/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
