On 3/4/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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! >
Done! I also did some other cleanup in PEP 0: marked PEP 3102 (keyword-only arguments), PEP 3104 (nonlocal), and 3107 (annotations) as finished. Made PEP 3106 (dict views) as accepted but left as not implemented as there is still an Open Issues section. I reclassified PEP 3108 (stdlib cleanup) as Standards Track instead of Informational as it will need a pronouncement some day and Informational PEPs basically don't. We really need to make PEP 0 be auto-generated so we stop having to edit the darn thing and having it outdated. > > > 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? I literally pasted in that example function and that triggered 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! :-) > =) Neal better watch out. -Brett _______________________________________________ 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
