On 01/26/2015 12:09 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:06:26 -0800 > Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote: >> It destroy's the chaining value and pretty much makes the improvement not an improvement. If there's a possibility that >> the same key could be in more than one of the dictionaries then you still have to do the >> >> dict.update(another_dict) > > So what? Is the situation where chaining is desirable common enough? Common enough to not break it, yes. > Not every new feature warrants a syntax addition - especially when it > raises eyebrows as here, and ends up being as obscure as Perl code. Not sure what you mean here -- the new feature is a syntax addition (or more appropriately a generalization of existing syntax). -- ~Ethan~ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20150126/7f0e618f/attachment.sig>
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