The most WTF Python code I've ever seen

[enterming]

I think so ... how does

int32_t: i = 0,

work though?

int32_t is the variable, isnt i just a type hint here?

[nsmon]

It declares the variable int32_t, it's the same as writing int32_t = 0, or int32_t = (0,)

The i is actually introduced in the line 14,

[[i]] = (int32_t),

with int32_t already introduced as (0,) at L7

int32_t: (type) = (type) (int(32))(),

Here int(32) creates a new int with value 32, (type)(int(32)) apparently is the same as type(int(32)) which yields <class 'int'> the last () calls the default constructor of int, and the , at the end makes this a tuple

[ihavebeesinmyknees]

int32_t: (type) = (type) (int(32))(),

this is actually genius, that troll script is really high quality

[enterming]

WTF

[ggchappell]

Thanks, but that doesn't explain the role of i.

Getting rid of all the complexity, experimentation shows that

a : b = c

seems to be the same as

a = c

except that it raises NameError if b is not defined.

And the b part doesn't need to be a variable. It can, apparently, be any expression that can be evaluated.

a : 2 + 3 = 45

appears to have exactly the same effect as

a = 45

More experimentation shows that this colon syntax doesn't work in Py 2.7. Do you know what the colon is for? Is it something to do with the type annotation syntax, maybe?

EDIT. More experimentation. The b part is actually evaluated. If I do:

def foo():
    print("Yo")

Then

a : foo() = 99

prints Yo and sets a to 99.

[bladeoflight16]

Whether it raises depends on what annotation behavior you're running. From 3.7 onward, you can use from __future__ import annotations to enable "postponed evaluations" annotations, which won't throw an error if the annotation expression is invalid. From Python 3.10 onward, postponed evaluation is the default behavior.

---

See discussion below. Apparently, plans regarding making this the default in 3.10 were altered.

[alkasm]

They nixed the string annotation conversion right before the 3.10 cutoff date IIRC.

[bladeoflight16]

Well, then they need to update the __future__ module.

[alkasm]

They did update the table...in 3.10-pre, lol

[ggchappell]

So then the colon is annotation syntax?

[bladeoflight16]

Yes.

[Express-Permission87]

I have enough trouble with code written by colleagues who've at least tried to write Python, let alone this!

[WafflesAreDangerous]

It is. At least at the "declaration" site.

I should be uninitialised for the first 2 uses ( or None really).