[Python-ideas] Add "default" kwarg to list.pop()

Chris Angelico rosuav at gmail.com
Wed Oct 31 06:31:37 EDT 2018


On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:14 PM Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 08:41:28PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 8:24 PM Nicolas Rolin <nicolas.rolin at tiime.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > As a user I always found a bit disurbing that dict pop method have a default while list and set doesn't.
> > > While it is way more computationally easy to check wether a list or a set is empty that to check if a key is in a dict, it still create a signature difference for no real reason (having a default to a built-in in python is pretty standard).
> > > It would be nice if every built-in/method of built-in type that returns a value and raise in some case have access to a default instead of raise, and not having to check the doc to see if it supports a default.
> > >
> >
> > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0463/ wants to say hi.
>
>
> PEP 463 is too busy crying bitter tears in the corner after being
> rejected to say "Hi".
>
> I don't think this is the same thing: PEP 464 is about being able to
> catch arbitrary exceptions in arbitrary expressions in an ad-hoc manner.
> Nicholas' suggestion is about making a consistent strategy of avoiding
> the need to catch exceptions.
>
> I don't think I would agree with a broad rule "anything that raises can
> return a default value" -- I don't think it makes sense to have, let's
> say, len(obj, default=2). But on a case-by-case basis, it works for me.

And that's exactly why a broad rule of "anything that raises can be
wrapped in a catcher" does make sense. Hence it may not be the same
thing, but it is an alternative solution that doesn't require
specifically angling for consistency.

ChrisA


More information about the Python-ideas mailing list