[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

That's a strawman argument. I am done arguing about this. On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:47 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > > > On Sat., 1 Aug. 2020, 10:55 am Guido van Rossum, wrote: > >> Trust me, the PEP authors are well aware. If we hadn't been from the >> outset, a hundred different proposals to "deal

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

On Sat., 1 Aug. 2020, 10:55 am Guido van Rossum, wrote: > Trust me, the PEP authors are well aware. If we hadn't been from the > outset, a hundred different proposals to "deal" with this would have. And > many of those proposals actually made it into the list of rejected ideas. > Moreover, we rew

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

Trust me, the PEP authors are well aware. If we hadn't been from the outset, a hundred different proposals to "deal" with this would have. And many of those proposals actually made it into the list of rejected ideas. Moreover, we rewrote a huge portion of the PEP from scratch as a result (everythin

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

On Fri., 31 Jul. 2020, 3:14 am Guido van Rossum, wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 4:34 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> I'm still only intermittently keeping up on python-dev, but my main >> concern with the first iteration remains in this version, which is that it >> doesn't even *mention* that the

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

On 31/07/2020 17:24, Rik de Kort via Python-Dev wrote: 1. Semantic operator overloading in generic contexts is very different from this use case. It's surrounded by a clear context. 2. Python programmer intuition varies across python programmers, and I would find it hella unintuitive if I had

[Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues

ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2020-07-24 - 2020-07-31) Python tracker at https://bugs.python.org/ To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue. Do NOT respond to this message. Issues counts and deltas: open7584 (+15) closed 45608 (+48) total 53192 (+63) Open issues wi

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

1. Semantic operator overloading in generic contexts is very different from this use case. It's surrounded by a clear context. 2. Python programmer intuition varies across python programmers, and I would find it hella unintuitive if I had to explicitly capture every variable. I just want to writ

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

+10. See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36825925/expressions-with-true-and-is-true-give-different-results/36826262#36826262 for concrete evidence where another semantically inconsistent operator overloading caused trouble and what Stroustroup has to say on the matter. On 31.07.2020 13:42, L

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

On 7/31/20 12:36 AM, Tobias Kohn wrote: And since pattern matching is really a new feature to be introduced to Python, a feature that can be seen in different lights, there is no 'Python-Programmer intuition' that would apply in this case. It's not fair to say "intuition doesn't apply because

[Python-Dev] Re: Python code coverage for integration Tests

Hello Magesh, This mailing list is for discussing the development of the Python language itself. For questions regarding developing with Python, please try other channels, such as the #python IRC channel on freenode or the python-list

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

Hi Caleb, I will only answer to the second part, as the wildcard issue has been brought up and discussed time and again, and the `np` analogue is quite a stretch and far-fetched, really. One thing that stood out a bit to me as I feel to have seen it a couple of times is the question of intuiti

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 622 version 2 (Structural Pattern Matching)

On 7/30/20 4:31 PM, Caleb Donovick wrote: However if the capture was explicit and any valid target could be used as a capture variable then I could express this cleanly: |def update_point_3d(p: Point3d, pt): match pt: case (p.x=, p.y=): pass case Point2d(p.x=, p.y=): pass ... | I like this p