It's off the table from the perspective of PEP 622 and its authors. If you want to write a competing PEP that proposes your idea that's totally fine.
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:17 PM Elliott Chen <elliottchen2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think my proposal should be off the table for scope reasons > because it requires the syntaxes to be completely unified and > interchangeable, which will be impossible if the current PEP is accepted. I > guess it's technically possible to still have the pattern-matching syntax > be slightly different from extended assignment statements, but I think that > would just unnecessarily complicate the language, force users to be aware > of the subtle differences when writing code, and potentially cause users to > make mistakes. > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/HF3ALPHOKKCT4ZNI5JV54L5QLDBGWRFQ/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/QHFWMQR7X7HMITYXDEBPWAGJ422KWUBU/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
