On 15/06/2022 23:01, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 01:58:28PM +0100, Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas wrote:
Please. This has been many times by several people already. No-one is
going to change their mind on this by now. There's no point in
rehashing it and adding noise to the
On 17/06/2022 04:23, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
I've been scolded that I'm not allowed to post unless I support the PEP.
Please do not misrepresent me. That is NOT what I said.
Rob Cliffe
Nonetheless, I reiterate that I oppose it. There is no "preponderance"
of support, but perhaps a slim majo
On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 at 12:52, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>
> Restarting this with an improved title "Bare" vs "Raw", and I will try not to
> digress so much in the new thread.
>
> My suggestion is to allow a bare asterisk at the end of a desctructuring
> expression to indicate that additional elemen
I've been scolded that I'm not allowed to post unless I support the PEP.
Nonetheless, I reiterate that I oppose it. There is no "preponderance" of
support, but perhaps a slim majority of the small number who have commented
(5 vs 3, I think).
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022, 10:38 PM Steve Jorgensen wrote:
Restarting this with an improved title "Bare" vs "Raw", and I will try not to
digress so much in the new thread.
My suggestion is to allow a bare asterisk at the end of a desctructuring
expression to indicate that additional elements are to be ignored if present
and not iterated over if the rhs
Is there anything that I can do, as a random Python user to help move this to
the next stage? I'm happy to go along with whatever the preponderance of
responses here seem to think in terms of which syntax choice is best. Although
I have a slight preference, all of the options seem decent to me.
