On 3/4/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/4/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see lukewarm support for keeping these at most, and probably > > lukewarm support for removing them at well. That means I get to decide > > and nobody will care much (for once :-). So my decision is to get rid > > of them. > > Woohoo! Can I go ahead and mark the PEP as accepted then?
Please do! > > Actually they can be annotated. But that's no reason to keep them either. > > :-) > > I actually meant they can't be annotated like ``def fxn((a, b):int): > pass``. I think what Guido is thinking of is ``def fxn((a:int, > b:int)): pass`` (although that causes an assertion error: > Python/compile.c:2430: failed assertion `scope || > PyString_AS_STRING(name)[0] == '_''). Hm, I've never seen that assert. How to provoke it? Anyway, it will be ripped out when the tuple parameters are ripped out. You might even get the prize for ripping out the most code! :-) > > Though the PEP might be fixed. > > I will do that right now. Great! -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
