Received?
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 3:39 PM Buck Evan <buck.2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I started to send this to python-ideas, but I'm having second thoughts.
> Does tihs have merit?
>
> ---
> I stumble on this a lot, and I see it in many python libraries:
>
> def f(*args, **kwargs):
> ...
>
> f(*[list comprehension])
> f(**mydict)
>
> It always seems a shame to carefully build up an object in order to
> explode it, just to pack it into a near-identical object.
>
> Today I was fiddling with the new python3.7 inspect.signature
> functionality when I ran into this case:
>
> def f(**kwargs): pass
> sig = inspect.signature(f)
> print(sig.bind(a=1, b=2))
>
> The output is "<BoundArguments (kwargs={'a': 1, 'b': 2})>". I found this a
> bit humorous since anyone attempting to bind values in this way, using
> f(kwargs={'a': 1, 'b': 2}) will be sorely dissappointed. I also wondered
> why BoundArguments didn't print '**kwargs' since that's the __str__ of that
> parameter object.
>
> The syntax I'm proposing is:
> f(**kwargs={'a': 1, 'b': 2})
>
> as a synonym of f(a=1, b=2) when an appropriate dictionary is already on
> hand.
>
> ---
> I can argue for this another way as well.
>
> 1)
> When both caller and callee have a known number of values to pass/receive,
> that's the usual syntax:
> def f(x) and f(1)
>
> 2)
> When the caller has a fixed set of values, but the callee wants to handle
> a variable number: def f(*args) and f(1)
>
> 3)
> Caller has a variable number of arguments (varargs) but the call-ee is
> fixed, that's the splat operator: def f(x) and f(*args)
>
> 4)
> When case 1 and 3 cross paths, and we have a vararg in both the caller and
> callee, right now we're forced to splat both sides: def f(*args) and
> f(*args), but I'd like the option of opting-in to passing along my list
> as-is with no splat or collection operations involved: def f(*args) and
> f(*args=args)
>
> Currently the pattern to handle case 4 neatly is to define two versions of
> a vararg function:
>
> def f(*arg, **kwargs):
> return _f(args, kwargs)
>
> return _f(args, kwargs):
> ...
>
> Such that when internal calllers hit case 4, there's a simple and
> efficient way forward -- use the internal de-vararg'd definition of f.
> External callers have no such option though, without breaking protected api
> convention.
>
> My proposal would simplify this implementation as well as allowing users
> to make use of a similar calling convention that was only provided
> privately before.
>
> Examples:
>
> log(*args) and _log(args) in logging.Logger
> format and vformat of strings.Formatter
>
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
