On 11/22/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 08:57 PM 11/21/2006 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >Phillip, please shorten your posts. You're hogging all the bandwidth I > >have for thinking about this. Please! > > Er, that *was* the shortened version; I actually spent about an hour *just* > on shortening it. > > I tried to write a short reply to your message, but with little > success. So, I'll just rate limit myself by refraining from posting for a > couple of days. Will that work?
I'm also getting overloaded by the flood of information in the longer postings in this thread, compounded by the relatively abstract nature of the discussion. Phillip, as you seem to be of the view that your proposal is relatively small in scope, but wider in implications, maybe you could write a (pre-)PEP? Formally describing the problem, why the current solution(s) aren't sufficient, the precise implementation details and some simple but complete examples, may help people like me understand the scope of what you're proposing. But *please* keep it concrete - it's the abstract descriptions that are losing me! Paul. _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
