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

[Brett Cannon]

On 3/4/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On 3/4/07, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> > On 3/4/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > > I see lukewarm support for keeping these at most, and probably
> > > lukewarm support for removing them at well. That means I get to decide
> > > and nobody will care much (for once :-). So my decision is to get rid
> > > of them.
> >
> > Woohoo!  Can I go ahead and mark the PEP as accepted then?
>
> Please do!
>

Done!

I also did some other cleanup in PEP 0: marked PEP 3102 (keyword-only
arguments), PEP 3104 (nonlocal), and 3107 (annotations) as finished.
Made PEP 3106 (dict views) as accepted but left as not implemented as
there is still an Open Issues section.  I reclassified PEP 3108
(stdlib cleanup) as Standards Track instead of Informational as it
will need a pronouncement some day and Informational PEPs basically
don't.

We really need to make PEP 0 be auto-generated so we stop having to
edit the darn thing and having it outdated.

> > > Actually they can be annotated. But that's no reason to keep them either. :-)
> >
> > I actually meant they can't be annotated like ``def fxn((a, b):int):
> > pass``.  I think what Guido is thinking of is ``def fxn((a:int,
> > b:int)): pass`` (although that causes an assertion error:
> > Python/compile.c:2430: failed assertion `scope ||
> > PyString_AS_STRING(name)[0] == '_'').
>
> Hm, I've never seen that assert. How to provoke it?

I literally pasted in that example function and that triggered it.

> Anyway, it will be
> ripped out when the tuple parameters are ripped out. You might even
> get the prize for ripping out the most code! :-)
>

=)  Neal better watch out.

-Brett