https://github.com/kirbyfan64/_frozensafemockobjectimplementation In all seriousness, though, I really feel like that would be the ultimate bug magnet, since it'd be easy to forget to un-wrap the object afterwards. -- Ryan [ERROR]: Your autotools build scripts are 200 lines longer than your program. Something’s wrong. http://kirbyfan64.github.io/ On Sep 10, 2016 5:21 PM, "David Mertz" <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
I find the '?.' syntax very ugly, much more so in the examples of chained attributes.
A much better way to handle the use case is to wrap objects in a class that gives this "propagating None" behavior with plain attribute access. A nice implementation was presented in this thread.
On Sep 10, 2016 3:16 PM, "Random832" <random832@fastmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2016, at 13:26, Guido van Rossum wrote:
The way I recall it, we arrived at the perfect syntax (using ?) and semantics. The issue was purely strong hesitation about whether sprinkling ? all over your code is too ugly for Python
I think that if there's "strong hesitation" about something being "too ugly" it can't really be described as "the perfect syntax". IIRC there were a couple alternatives being discussed that would have reduced the number of question marks to one [or one per object which might be None]. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/