On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 10:35 AM Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
On 5/1/22 00:21, Christopher Barker wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 2:17 PM Pablo Alcain wrote:
It shows that out of 20k analyzed classes in the selected libraries (including black, pandas, numpy, etc), ~17% of them could benefit from the usage of auto-assign syntax.
I only read English, and haven't studied the coe, so I don't know how that works, but assuming it's accurately testing for the simple cases that auto-assigning could work for;
That's not that much actually -- for approx every six-parameter function, one of them could be auto-assigned.or for every six functions, one could make good use of auto- assignment (and maybe be a dataclass?)
I think you place too much emphasis on dataclasses -- none of my projects use them, nor could they.
Going through a one of my smaller projects, this is what I found:
- number of `__init__`s: 11 - number of total params (not counting self): 25 - number of those params assigned as-is: 19 - number of `__init__`s where all are assigned as-is: 6 - number of non-`__init__`s where this would useful: 0
And I'm not trying to be a Negative Nelly here -- I honestly don't know, I actually expected it to be higher than 17% -- but in any case, I think it should be higher than 17% to make it worth a syntax addition.
17% is a massive amount of code.
But pandas and numpy may not be the least bit representative [...]?
This would not be the first time Python was improved to help the scientific community.
My own thoughts about the proposal: It seems interesting, and assigning as-is arguments is a chore -- but I'm not sure using up a token to help only one method per class is a good trade.
Yes, I agree that the cost/benefit should be analyzed. For what it's worth, the choice of the `@` was because of two different reasons: first, because we were inspired by Ruby's syntax (later on learned that CoffeeScript and Crystal had already taken the approach we are proposing) and because the `@` token is already used as an infix for `__matmul__` ( https://peps.python.org/pep-0465/). I believe it's the only usage that it has, so it probably won't be that confusing to give it this new semantic as well. All of this, I believe, mitigate the "using up a token", but it's not enough to make it a clear decision, so I 100% agree with your concern.
-- ~Ethan~ _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/2GR5G6... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/