Joshua Landau wrote:
What about:
class Foo: bar = bar
That would be going too far, I think. I can't remember *ever* needing to write code like that in a class. On the other hand, passing function arguments received from a caller on to another function under the same names is very common. Also, it's a somewhat dubious thing to write anyway, since it relies on name lookups in a class scope working dynamically. While they currently do in CPython, I wouldn't like to rely on that always remaining the case. I'm not sure about the dictionary case. It's not strictly necessary, since if you have it for keyword arguments, you can do dict(=a, =b, =c). So I'm +1 on allowing this for function arguments, -0 for dicts, and -1 on anything else. -- Greg