Ethan Furman wrote: > On 04/20/2018 11:15 AM, Christoph Groth wrote: > > Nick Coghlan wrote: > > > >> I also think that if "=" and ":=" both target the same kind of scope, > >> there isn't enough new expressiveness introduced by the latter to > >> justify the syntactic complexity of adding it. > > > > OK, but then how about introducing assignment expressions with the "=" > > operator but *requiring* extra parens (similar to how modern C > > compilers warn about assignment expressions without parens), e.g. > > Using a single "=" for assignment expressions isn't going to happen. > Period. Huh, I didn't want to irritate anyone! Guido wrote [1] on python-ideas: > I also think it's fair to at least reconsider adding inline > assignment, with the "traditional" semantics (possibly with mandatory > parentheses). This would be easier to learn and understand for people > who are familiar with it from other languages (C++, Java, JavaScript). I interpreted this in the way that he at least doesn't rule out "= with parens" completely. Perhaps he meant ":= with parens", but that would seem redundant. [1] https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2018-March/049409.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