[Python-ideas] PEP for issue2292, "Missing *-unpacking generalizations"

[Guido van Rossum]

I guess I have to read the whole PEP first. :-) That will be after
July 9th (the Dropbox developer conference).

On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Joshua Landau
<joshua.landau.ws at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 July 2013 00:34, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
>> What do yo mean by Status Quo? No version of Python supports multiple
>> *args or a regular positional arg after *args or after kw=arg.
>>
>> The only flexibility that was added "recently" (in 2.6) is that kw=arg
>> may now follow *args.
>
> It's the one that changes the least -- given that people seem to have
> accepted [1] multiple unpacking, and that you seem to have already (in
> the issue tracker) accepted [2] "foo(*a, b, c)"¹, should we continue
> with the restriction that "Keyword-arguments must follow positional
> arguments, and ``**`` unpackings must also follow ``*`` unpackings"?
>
> That has the fewest changes, but I believe that given [1] and [2] that
> these restrictions are either insufficient (hence the rejected
> "Original Proposal" from the PEP) or confusing (hence the additional
> "Looser rulings").
>
> aka. I didn't mean Status Quo as "change nothing", but "change nothing
> other than those two things we already seem to like".
>
> ¹ And, by extension, one could also assume you support "foo(**a, b=...)"



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)