On 28 May 2016 at 14:34, Joao S. O. Bueno <jsbueno@python.org.br> 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.
Well, I jsut replied upon hitting the "import" suggestion for the first time. Distinguishing it from module imports, of course, is a must. And them, even if using another keyword than "import" (and requiring a specfic name after from) I stil find it much better than the proposals introducing brackets on the LHS ,and loaded with DRY violations.
-- Zach _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/