On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 11:53 AM Yurii Karabas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Proposed syntax:
>
> m = {"a": 1, "b": 2, "c": 3, "d": 4}
>
> {a, b} = m # a: 1, b: 2
> {a, b, **rest} = m # a: 1, b: 2, rest: {c: 3, d: 4}
>
> as equivalent to this from PEP 634:
> match m:
> case {"a": a, "b": b, **rest}:
> pass
> case _:
> raise ValueError
What I find particularly unsatisfying is that the left hand side syntax in
your proposal {a, b, **rest} is not at all like, the case syntax {"a": a,
"b": b, **rest} so that's twice as much syntax to learn.
*IF* this is really used often enough that it is worth adding to the
language it should be a variation of match, something like:
match m as {"a": a, "b": b, **rest}
The match clause defaults to doing nothing if the value doesn't match but
that's less useful here (and harder to deal with since figuring out that a,
b, and rest are still unbound is clumsy, so I would agree that it should
raise ValueError if there's no match.
--- Bruce
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZQZAJLBX2FJENEN6XKSWCI3Q6QTHTHAS/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
