Brandt Bucher

I don't think that's workable, though. It would mean that: ```py match ...: case P1 if C1, P2 if C2: ... ``` ...is equivalent to... ```py match ...: case ((P1...

Can we make a decision on this? I now favor `as` for its left-to-right semantics and readability. Unlike `|` and `_`, there's no real visual reason to prefer `:=` over...

I do not have a strong opinion whether it is right to add sub-guards or not. Drawing from my experience with PEP 614, though, I believe it may be wise...

Heh, great point. This seems fine as-is.

Yeah, this will likely be the biggest sticking-point. I'm not personally even 80% satisfied with *any* proposed option, which is... frustrating.

I still dislike the uppercase rule, because the language is now enforcing a convention (and one that *may* not always be "correct" in this context). It also only enforces it...

Either way, I think it's important to constantly emphasize (especially when discussing name patterns) that we are creating this feature specifically for destructuring, not switching. That should help reduce pushback...

> I also like the SyntaxWarning! Very nice indeed! I knew you would like that. > I am not entirely sure whether the use of the language in markdown can...

**I vote no uppercase.** I still like the leading dot, actually... though I recognize that adding back it later is painless.

This has been implemented. Still needs PEP though.