Richard Damon writes: > I thought _ was also commonly used as: > > first, -, last = (1, 2, 3) > > as a generic don't care about assignment.
It is. But there are other options (eg, 'ignored') if '_' is used for translation in the same scope. > 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. Exactly. > As long as the bindings in match also make the symbol a local > (which seems reasonable) then you would get a similar restriction. It's quite different. First, it surely won't make other symbols match-local. Of course there will be times when you do all the work inside the match statement. But often you'll want to do bindings in a match statement, then use those outside. The second problem is that this use of '_' isn't optional. It's part of the syntax. That means that you can't use the traditional marking of a translateable string (and it's not just tradition; there is a lot of external software that expects it) in that scope. So it's practically important, if not theoretically necessary, that 'case _' not bind '_'. Steve _______________________________________________ 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/6SDEJKTXJE4HS5CM2HIGB3ZYS5IN2BAZ/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/