"Andrew Koenig" <ark at acm.org> writes:
>> The only practical reason to like this feature is sparing the need of
>> finding an otherwise useless name for the formal argument. Another
>> reason, but not practical at all, is that the concept conveys some
>> elegance and originality (each programming language should ideally have
>> a few of these) and is enforced in other places in Python, like in the
>> `for' statement -- where I find implied unpacking very, very useful.
>
> One other reason: It is possible to imagine using the feature to catch some
> type errors at the point of call, rather than having to get into the
> function itself before detecting them.
Conceptually, maybe, but implementation wise, that's not how things
work.
Cheers,
mwh
--
I love the way Microsoft follows standards. In much the same
manner that fish follow migrating caribou. -- Paul Tomblin
-- http://home.xnet.com/~raven/Sysadmin/ASR.Quotes.html
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4