[Python-3000] PEP 3113 (Removal of Tuple Parameter Unpacking)

[Brett Cannon]

On 3/2/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> Very cool. This should make the PEP a complete success!
>

Thanks to Collin for doing this!  Makes my life a heck of a lot easier.

-Brett


> On 3/2/07, Collin Winter <collinw at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/2/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > > On 3/2/07, Collin Winter <collinw at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 3/2/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > > > > Has anyone tried to create a 2to3 transformer for this? I think it
> > > > > should be possible, although there are a few warts (like inserting the
> > > > > new code after the docstring, and how to come up with names for the
> > > > > anonymous tuple(s), and having to do it for potentially any number of
> > > > > arguments. Still, it would require no dataflow analysis, and the
> > > > > except transformer already has a similar statement insertion. So I
> > > > > think it's doable.
> > > >
> > > > I can take a crack at this. I had to do similar things for the raise
> > > > fixer before switching it over to use with_traceback().
> > >
> > > That would be great! You may end up adding some generally useful code
> > > for inserting statements into a block...
> >
> > I just checked in fixes/fix_tuple_params.py (and associated tests). I
> > still want to work on the code that generates the new names (so that
> > they'll be more appropriate), but the functionality is there.
> >
> > I definitely want to sit down and abstract out the "insert these stmts
> > at the beginning of a suite" logic. fix_tuple_params includes support
> > for "def foo(): x = 5; y = 7"-style functions, which leads to some
> > less-than-attractive code.
> >
> > Collin Winter
> >
>
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
>