On May 27 2016, Ethan Furman <ethan-gcWI5d7PMXnvaiG9KC9N7Q@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 05/27/2016 08:09 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
On May 26 2016, Paul Moore wrote:
On 26 May 2016 at 18:55, Ethan Furman wrote:
With the simple syntax that I could live with, a real example could be:
{active_id, active_ids, active_model} = context
or
{partner_id, product_id, ship_to, product_ids} = values
The behaviour of using the names of the variables from the LHS to introspect the value on the RHS is, to me, extremely magical and unlike anything I've seen in any other language. I don't think it sits well in Python, even though it is certainly a very readable idiom for the sort of unpacking we're talking about here.
Very true. But as someone else already said (I can't find the email right now), we have a different construct that everyone is familiar with and that's easily adapted for this situation:
from dict context import active_id, active_ids, active_model
or more general:
"from dict" <expr> "import" <identifier list>
Everyone knows that "from .. import .." modifies the local namespace. We just have to extend it to work not just on modules, but also on dictionaries.
-1
import works with modules.
You don't think of it as "*import*ing something from another namespace into the local namespace"? That's the first thing that I associate with it.
Having it work with other things would muddy the concept, plus make module/object naming conflicts an even bigger hassle.
You did see that I proposed "from dict <> import ..", instead of "from <> import ..", right? The latter would continue to work only for modules. The form would be new syntax and only work for dicts. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«