On 5/28/2016 1:34 PM, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
On 27 May 2016 at 12:37, Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pyideas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Michael Selik <michael.selik@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 11:28 AM Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pyideas@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's a crazy thought that might be best dismissed out of hand: what about extending 'from name import other_names' to accept any object for <name>? First try to get values via __getitem__() (possibly only for dict/dict subclasses?), next try getattr(), finally try to import the module and pull values from it as per usual.
Pros: - solves dict unpacking
Would it solve nested dict unpacking?
How do you mean? Replacing `some_name = some_dict['some_key']['some_name']` with `from some_dict['some_key'] import some_name`?
Sure, why not? :)
That is the best idea I've seem on this thread.
And them, why having to specify the keys, just to violate DRY?
Maybe just allwoing Mappings to be usedwith `from ... import ...` syntax will work nicely, unambiguously, with no new weird syntaxes introduced - and the syntax even allows one to rename the dict keys to other variables, with the `from mymapping import a as c, b as d " variant.
That would be certainly nice.
Wouldn't this approach require that the keys be constants? That is, you couldn't implement a replacement for: val = d[key+'bar'] I'm not sure that's a reasonable restriction. Eric.