Thanks very much for your work! I am CC'ing python-dev to see if there are any last calls for PEP 448. Assuming no material objection appear to the new syntax and semantics, I can approve the PEP later this week. To get it committed, you need one of the active committers to give you a code review (waiting for me would mean waiting forever). Maybe Antoine, Benjamin or Victor? On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Neil Girdhar <mistersheik@gmail.com> wrote:

I believe I have finally finished the work on the patch for PEP 448 ( http://bugs.python.org/issue2292). How do we get the PEP approved? What else would we need to check it into Python?

Best,

Neil

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:

...

OK. I don't like arg unpackings after keyword args, for the same reason plain positional args aren't allowed after keyword args, but I guess I didn't pay attention when it was introduced, so we're stuck with it now, it's not the end of the world, and at least the definition is clear (collect all positional args first, then handle keyword args).

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Neil Girdhar <mistersheik@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Okay, so: positional arguments neither follow keyword arguments nor keyword argument unpackings; iterable argument unpackings never follow keyword argument unpackings.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Joshua Landau <joshua@landau.ws> wrote:

...

On 20 January 2015 at 16:38, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:

...

The PEP hasn't been accepted yet AFAIK... I'm generally okay with allowing multiple *x things (except in an *unpack* position of course) but I still don't think we should be mixing positional and keyword args. So, no f(a, b=2, c), nor f(a, b=2, *c).

f(a, b=2, *c) is currently legal as both a call and as a definition:

a, *c = 1, 2, 3

def f(*args, **kwargs): print(args, kwargs)

f(a, b=2, *c) #>>> (1, 2, 3) {'b': 2}

def f(a, b=2, *c): print(a, b, c)

f(1, 2, 3) #>>> 1 2 (3,)

So I imagine that's staying (or, at least, this PEP isn't removing it). I don't think anyone is (yet) arguing for f(a, b=2, c). _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

--

--- You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "python-ideas" group. To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/python-ideas/J99EFY1D1nI/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to python-ideas+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)

-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)