Just to be clear, PEP 584 (dictionary operators) is currently in draft form and
is undergoing a new round of revisions. Nothing has been finalized, much less
approved.
Brandt
___
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:41:50PM -0700, Andrew Barnert wrote:
> Are runtime union types actually types, unlike the things in typing,
> or are they still non-type values that just have special handling as
> the second argument of isinstance and issubclass and maybe except
> statements?
Union
On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 16:51, Andrew Barnert wrote:
>
> You say here “the dict insertion code” does it. Would they mean
> d[key]=d.skip doesn’t insert anything?
Yes.
If so, then how could I put skip in a dict at all?
The intention is that you couldn't. This could raise some implementation
iss
On Friday, September 6, 2019, 1:51:35 AM PDT, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:41:50PM -0700, Andrew Barnert wrote:
>> Are runtime union types actually types, unlike the things in typing,
>> or are they still non-type values that just have special handling as
>> the secon
On Friday, September 6, 2019, 11:22:08 AM PDT, Rich Smith
wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 16:51, Andrew Barnert wrote:
>> You say here “the dict insertion code” does it. Would they mean
>> d[key]=d.skip doesn’t insert anything? > Yes.
OK, then I go from +0 on your proposal to -1.
Constructing d
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 07:44:19PM +, Andrew Barnert wrote:
> > Union, and unions, are currently types:
>
> > py> isinstance(Union, type)
> > True
> >
> > py> isinstance(Union[int, str], type)
> > True
>
> What version of Python are you using here?
Ah, I didn't realise that the behaviour h
On Friday, September 6, 2019, 5:41:23 PM PDT, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 07:44:19PM +, Andrew Barnert wrote:
>> > Union, and unions, are currently types:
>>
>> > py> isinstance(Union, type)
>> > True
>> >
>> > py> isinstance(Union[int, str], type)
>> > True
>>
>>
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 01:54, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 8:37 PM Joao S. O. Bueno
> wrote:
>
>> Also, if one have in mind that dict addition with the `+` operator had
>> been
>> recelently approved
>>
>
> Where did you hear this? I am not aware that this was even made into a
On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 12:35:09AM -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> Well - the idea showed up here, and got an immediate "that is nice, let's
> do it" from you, followed by approval from a lot more people, and
> very little controverse. So, it is pretty much "approved", even if not yet
> detailed
