On Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 6:30 AM Anders Hovmöller <boxed@killingar.net wrote:

> I don't see anything here that can't be done by returning a dict, a
> namedtuple (possibly with optional fields), or some other object with
> named fields. They can be optional, they can have defaults, and you can
> extend the object by adding new fields without breaking backwards
> compatibility.

That assumes you knew before hand to do that. The question is about the normal situation when you didn't.

Also you totally disregarded the call site where there is no way to do a nice dict unpacking in python. The tuple case is super special and convenient but strictly worse than having properly named fields.

To me this question sounds like it's about dict unpacking with one special case to keep backwards compatibility.

My "destructure" module might help. I was playing around with the idea of dict unpacking and extended it to a kind of case matching.


Grant Jenks independently came to almost the same idea and implementation.