[Python-Dev] The interpreter accepts f(**{'5':'foo'}); is this intentional? (original) (raw)

Calvin Spealman ironfroggy at gmail.com
Thu Feb 5 16:31:56 CET 2009


I would favor this not being constrained. I don't want every use of ** to cause a pattern match to verify each key. I would even be fine without the check for being strings. Define what it should be, but let the implementation be lax. It is no different from any other place where you need to know its not a promise, just an artifact, and shouldn't rely on what the implementation currently does or does not force.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

I can't find documentation about whether there are constraints imposed on the keys in the map passed to a function via **, as in f(**d).

According to http://docs.python.org/reference/expressions.html#id9 , d must be a mapping. testextcall.py implies that the keys of this map must be strings in the following test: >>> f(**{1:2}) Traceback (most recent call last): ... TypeError: f() keywords must be strings But must the keys be valid python identifiers? In particular, the following is allows by the Python 2.5.2 and the Jython 2.2.1 interpreters: >>> f(**{'1':2}) {'1': 2} Is this behavior required somewhere by the Python language spec, or is it an error that just doesn't happen to be checked, or is it intentionally undefined whether this is allowed? Michael


Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev at python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ironfroggy%40gmail.com

-- Read my blog! I depend on your acceptance of my opinion! I am interesting! http://techblog.ironfroggy.com/ Follow me if you're into that sort of thing: http://www.twitter.com/ironfroggy



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list