On 4 July 2013 05:47, alex23 wrote:
> On 4/07/2013 2:12 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
>>
>> On 4 July 2013 04:52, Maciej Dziardziel wrote:
>>>
>>> def foo(*args, bar=1, **kwargs):
>>> pass
>
>
>> Try "foo(1)" and it will fail -- "bar" needs to be given as a keyword.
>
>
> No it won't, because it
On 4/07/2013 2:12 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
On 4 July 2013 04:52, Maciej Dziardziel wrote:
def foo(*args, bar=1, **kwargs):
pass
Try "foo(1)" and it will fail -- "bar" needs to be given as a keyword.
No it won't, because it is supplied with a default. You may be
confusing it with the r
On Thursday, July 4, 2013 5:05:23 AM UTC+1, alex23 wrote:
> It was an explicit syntax change for Python3. You can read about the
> reasoning behind it here:
>
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3102/
Thanks, that was helpful.
Maciej Dziardziel
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python
On 4 July 2013 04:52, Maciej Dziardziel wrote:
> Out of curiosity: Does anyone know why the code below is valid in python3,
> but not python2:
>
> def foo(*args, bar=1, **kwargs):
> pass
Python 3 gained syntax for keyword-only arguments.
Try "foo(1)" and it will fail -- "bar" needs to be gi
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Maciej Dziardziel wrote:
> Out of curiosity: Does anyone know why the code below is valid in python3,
> but not python2:
>
> def foo(*args, bar=1, **kwargs):
> pass
Keyword-only arguments are (IIRC) a Py3-only feature. There are lots
of features that don't wor
On 4/07/2013 1:52 PM, Maciej Dziardziel wrote:
Out of curiosity: Does anyone know why the code below is valid in python3, but
not python2:
def foo(*args, bar=1, **kwargs):
pass
It was an explicit syntax change for Python3. You can read about the
reasoning behind it here:
http://www.pyth
Out of curiosity: Does anyone know why the code below is valid in python3, but
not python2:
def foo(*args, bar=1, **kwargs):
pass
--
Maciej Dziardziel
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
