Home Original page

[Python-ideas] Immutable Builder" Pattern and Operator

Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com
Mon Jan 23 09:53:25 EST 2017 
On 23 January 2017 at 13:47, Hervé "Kyle" MUTOMBO
<hervinhioslash at gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul Moore is clearly right when He says that this "a .= 1+1" doesn't make
> sense. It means nothing understandable although in "a .= s(e)" can mean
> something. As a matter of fact "a .= EXPR" is bound to succeed only in a
> very small set of cases.

By responding to a digest you make it very hard to see what you're
replying to. Could you get the messages as individual ones, and reply
quoting the context properly, please?

I'm not sure how to interpret your above comment in the light of your
other comment

> Pleasing to see and somehow elegant. I believe .= is a good idea.

as I'm arguing pretty strongly that .= is *not* a good idea, because
there are all sorts of ill-defined cases that haven't been clearly
explained in a way that matches the rest of Python's grammar and
semantics.

Paul
More information about the Python-ideas mailing list