What is a function parameter =[] for?

[Antoon Pardon]

Op 25-11-15 om 18:40 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 08:56 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> 
>> Since (x, y, z) is not a fixed value, it is not a literal.
> 
> Right. And therefore, (x, y, z) syntax is not syntax for a literal. Hence
> why the Python docs call it a tuple display instead of a tuple literal --
> no matter what x, y, z are. Even if they themselves are literals, that's
> just a special case that *some* compiler versions may be able to handle.
> 
> You call this "picking nits", but if so, they are nits that are twice the
> size of an an elephant and painted bright yellow. Your language arguing
> about "tuple literals" seems to be based on the idea that it is usually a
> constant and that cases like (x+1, y+2) is some unusual, rare corner
> case -- what you call "nits".

I don't know what you are talking about. The first thing I have argued
is that () is a literal. Then I have expaned that to that something
like (3, 5, 8) is a literal. I never argued that tuple expressions
in general are literals. And one way I supported my point was with the
following quote from the python language reference.

  Literals are notations for constant values of some built-in types.

And I think that the things I argued were literals, were in fact
constant values of some built-in type.

> Its not. The most general case is that a
> tuple display is an expression which, after evaluation, constructs a tuple.
> Those few cases where the compiler can optimize it into a constant are the
> nits, not the majority of cases when it can't.

The nits, depend on what someone tries to argue. Since I didn't try
to argue that tuple displays in general are literals but argued
for very specific tuple values to be literals, you starting
about tuple displays is going of on a tangent that has little
to do with what I was arguing.

-- 
Antoon