I'd say let sleeping dogs lie.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> If I had it to do over again, I’d implement it more strictly and only
> allow chars that are valid in identifiers.
>
> But see https://bugs.python.org/issue31907 for a case that is currently
> valid and would
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Serhiy Storchaka
wrote:
> 29.10.17 19:04, Guido van Rossum пише:
>
>> It's somewhat problematic. If I subclass dict with a different
>> constructor, but I don't overload copy(), how can the dict.copy() method
>> construct a correct instance of the subclass? Even i
If I had it to do over again, I’d implement it more strictly and only allow
chars that are valid in identifiers.
But see https://bugs.python.org/issue31907 for a case that is currently valid
and would break if we changed how it worked.
I’m not sure it’s worth the churn of deprecating this and
According to the specification of format string syntax [1] (I meant
str.format(), not f-strings), both argument name and attribute name must
be Python identifiers.
But the current implementation is more lenient and allow arbitrary
sequences of characters while they don't contain '.', '[', ']',
29.10.17 19:04, Guido van Rossum пише:
It's somewhat problematic. If I subclass dict with a different
constructor, but I don't overload copy(), how can the dict.copy() method
construct a correct instance of the subclass? Even if the constructor
signatures match, how can dict.copy() make sure it
