On Apr 23, 2018, at 13:01, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
>
> On 04/22/2018 10:44 PM, Tim Peters wrote:
>>
>>
>> I find myself warming more to binding expressions the more I keep them
>> in mind while writing new code.
And I really like the term “binding expressions” because that’s how I think about this feature. I also think it will be easier to explain because “all it does” is bind a value to a name, and to me that’s the most powerful and valuable thing behind this feature.
> So I really like being able to make the assignment in the expression, but I have a really hard time parsing it with the name first.
Me too. Plus we *already* have precedence for spelling name bindings in similar constructs, such as import statements, with statements, and exceptions. It seems like a natural and Pythonic approach to extend that same spelling to binding expressions rather than introducing new, weird, symbols.
I also think it effectively solves the switch-statement problem:
if (get_response() as answer) == 'yes':
do_it()
elif answer == 'no':
skip_it()
elif answer == 'maybe'
okay_then()
That’s Pythonic enough for jazz!
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20180423/539adbf1/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