> Judging by the votes you got, your proposal is not well-liked. i'm at peace with that :) [1] > In general, breaking Python's syntax rules to introduce block

> Judging by the votes you got, your proposal is not well-liked. i'm at peace with that :) [1] > In general, breaking Python's syntax rules to introduce block expressions or what you want to call it seems like a steep price to pay for what amounts to syntactic sugar in the end. that's your opinion, i disagree! i think Python would be a better, more pleasant to use language if they figured this out. a girl can dream, ok? > What would be /really/ handy in Python is something like {'some_key': bind_value_to_this_name} = a_mapping yes, extending the destructuring syntax would be nice, i agree! but the original question was "Please suggest a pattern matching expression syntax [...]", and the post you were responding to was specifically talking about `match`'s syntax. [2] > I think you should read the PEPs on match/case i read them when they came out. i'm assuming you're referring to this section from PEP 622: > "In most other languages pattern matching is represented by an expression, not statement. But making it an expression would be inconsistent with other syntactic choices in Python." https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0622/#id77 https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0622/#id77 i believe Python's statement-orientatation kinda sucks, so to me this is just "things aren't great, let's stay consistent with that". yeah, yeah, "use a different language if you don't like it" etc. --- [1] well, maybe not quite, after all i'm here arguing about it. [2] `match` uses patterns like the one you described in `case` arms, but is distinct from them. i don't see why dict-destructuring syntax couldn't be added in a separate PEP.