RetroSearch Browse

Thu Feb 19 13:46:30 EST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-February/042635.html

On Feb 19, 2004, at 1:36 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:

> Bob Ippolito <bob at redivi.com> writes:
>
>> Here's a quick overview:
>>
>> def foo(args) [sugary, expressions, list]:
>> 	pass
>>
>> This is equivalent to:
>>
>> def foo(args):
>> 	pass
>> foo = list(expressions(sugary(foo)))

[examples showing how much nicer it makes type annotation in ctypes and 
PyObjC]

> BTW (I have this patch not yet applied), is it possible to use more 
> than
> one line, in this way?
>
> def function(arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5, arg6)
>         [dothis, dothat, doanother]:
>
> All in all, I'm +1 on the patch.

No, that is not valid syntax with the current patch.. you would need:
def function(arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5, arg6
	) [dothis, dothat, doanother]:

or

def function(arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5, arg6) [
	dothis, dothat, doanother]:

(or some variation, that makes it obvious to Python that the def is not 
complete).

-bob

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-February/042635.html below:

[Python-Dev] Plea for function/method syntax sugar (PEP 318, with a different syntax)