[Python-ideas] New 3.x restriction on number of keyword arguments

Cameron Simpson cs at zip.com.au
Fri Sep 17 23:56:55 CEST 2010


On 17Sep2010 23:21, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
| On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 07:05:46 +1000
| Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> wrote:
| > As an example, I use a personal encoding for natural numbers scheme
| > where values below 128 fit in one byte, 128 or more set the top bit on
| > leading bytes to indicate followon bytes, so values up to 16383 fit in
| > two bytes and so on arbitrarily. Compact and simple but unbounded.
| 
| Well, you are proposing that we (Python core maintainers) live with
| additional complication in one of the most central and critical parts of
| the interpreter, just so that we satisfy some theoretical impulse for
| "consistency". That doesn't sound reasonable. [...]
| For the record, have you been hit by this problem, or do you even think
| you might be hit by it in the near future?

Me, no. But arbitrary _syntactic_ constraints in an otherwise flexible
language grate. I was only suggesting a compactness-supporting approach,
not lobbying very hard for making the devs use it.

I'm +10 on removing the syntactic constraint, not on hacking the opcode
definitons.

Cheers,
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

Withdrawing in disgust is not the same as conceding.
        - Jon Adams <jadams at sea06f.sea06.navy.mil>



More information about the Python-ideas mailing list