[Python-Dev] Re: syntactic shortcut - unpack to variably sized list

[Nick Coghlan]

Carlos Ribeiro wrote:
> I may be wrong (and if that's the case, I would like to be politely
> educated on why), but isn't it already on a PEP-worthy point? IOW, if
> people are not interested, then the PEP will simply be rejected, which
> is a good thing, because it will at least document the case.

Good point - I've sent it to the PEP editors to request a number.

> I also
> believe that the pre-PEP should be posted to the main Python list,
> where it may be beaten to death & flamed by a larger audience. I am
> willing to do it myself, but I assume that is more polite on my part
> if I ask you to do it :-)

I'd wait to see what the PEP editors think, myself. I'm not entirely sure the 
idea is focused well enough to make a good PEP (I could argue either way, and I 
wrote the thing!).

However, if you want to post it over there for discussion, feel free.

>>Reference Implementation
>>========================
>>
>>As yet, no reference implementation is available for either part of the proposal.
> 
> 
> I though the iunpack() code in the previous section would be
> acceptable as a 'reference implementation'.

Unfortunately, itertools is a C module :P

>>Open Issues
>>===========
>>
>>- Should ``itertools.iunpack`` call ``iter()`` on its first argument?
> 
> +1

We'll go with that then. . . y'know, I could have made that change before 
sending the PEP draft in. Ah well, we can change it later - I doubt the PEP will 
surive c.l.p. (or even py-dev) unscathed, anyway.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan               |     Brisbane, Australia
Email: ncoghlan at email.com  | Mobile: +61 409 573 268