RetroSearch Browse

Wed Oct 9 14:38:46 CEST 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129298.html

2013/10/9 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>:
> The PEP needs to state more clearly up front (preferably in the title) that
> it's about *reserving* a Python level syntax that matches the syntax we
> worked out for Argument Clinic at PyCon US. Explicitly stating that the
> requirements that drive the Argument Clinic design are to support the
> signature of all current CPython builtins and extension modules would also
> be helpful.
>
> Generally, it needs to be a bit clearer that the intent of the PEP isn't to
> say "let's do this", it's to be explicit that acceptance of the Argument
> Clinic PEP severely constrains the design space for possible solutions if we
> ever *did* implement Python level support for positional only arguments.

Why does a syntax need to be reserved? Documentation conventions and
the syntax of internal tools like argument clinic may be changed any
time we like.

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129298.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 457: Syntax For Positional-Only Parameters