On Tue, Sep 1, 2020, 9:06 PM Ricky Teachey <ri...@teachey.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020, 8:35 PM Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 4:57 PM Greg Ewing <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/09/20 2:24 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 05:49:50PM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:
>>> >> On 30/08/20 3:06 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> >>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:13:38PM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> a[17, 42]
>>> >>>> a[time = 17, money = 42]
>>> >>>> a[money = 42, time = 17]
>>> >
>>
>> I agree it's a fine use case. Using the currently prevailing proposal
>> (which I steadfastly will refer to as "Steven's proposal") it's quite
>> possible to implement this.
>>
>
>> --
>> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
>>
>
> Can someone tell me...
>
> Is this right? Wrong? The hard way? The slow way?
>
Actually just realized I definitely did get it wrong:
def __getitem__(self, key=MISSING, time=MISSING, money=MISSING):
if time is MISSING or money is MISSING:
if time is not MISSING and key is not MISSING:
money, key = key, MISSING
elif money is not MISSING and key is not MISSING:
time, key = key, MISSING
elif time is MISSING and money is MISSING:
(time, money), key = key, MISSING
if key is not MISSING:
raise TypeError()
Still not sure if that is right.
_______________________________________________
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/HISY3CUPKUBV6TJEHXNANIKJL4IGVUEW/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
