On 6/25/2020 3:55 AM, Kyle Stanley wrote:
- Regarding the constant value pattern semantics, I'm okay with the
usage of the "." in general, but I completely agree with several others that it's rather difficult to read when there's a leading period with a single word, e.g. ".CONSTANT". To some degree, this could probably be less problematic with some reasonably good syntax highlighting to draw attention to the leading period.
However, I don't think it should be at all necessary for people to rely on syntax highlighting to be able to clearly see something that's part of a core Python language feature. It seems especially detrimental for those with visual impairment. As someone with relatively poor eye-sight who typically has to blow up the font size for my code to be readable (and often finds syntax highlighting to be distracting), I'm not really looking forward to squinting for missed leading periods when it was intended to refer to a constant reference. Even if it's a relatively uncommon case, with a core feature, it's bound to happen enough to cause some headaches.
A missing . is exactly the type of mistake I tend to make. It is also the type of mistake that I could stare at endlessly and not notice. Surely there could be a much more obvious way of doing things.
Other than this . issue, the PEP is great! I look forward to using match.