On 6/25/20 6:48 PM, Emily Bowman wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 3:41 PM Richard Damon > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Actually, you could make _ less special by still binding the value to > > it, just make it special in that you allow several values to be bound, > and maybe just define that the result will be just one of the values, > maybe even specify which if you want. > > > Like Guido said above, the problem is that _ is already effectively > reserved for translated text. Combining the two would feel a bit > weird, but should still be possible.
I thought _ was also commonly used as: first, -, last = (1, 2, 3) as a generic don't care about assignment. I guess since the above will create a local, so not overwrite a 'global' function _ for translations, so the above usage works as long as that function (or whatever namespace you are in) doesn't use _ for translations. As long as the bindings in match also make the symbol a local (which seems reasonable) then you would get a similar restriction. -- Richard Damon _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M5HWPDG43KGHKM6JVH7ZAGK6YT7OYVJR/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/