On 3/7/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/13/06, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/3/06, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 7/3/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It turns out I was misled by Collin's claim that the PEP wants > > > > isCallable and sequenceIncludes removed "because there are better, > > > > more obvious ways to spell these things." He must have made up the > > > > motivation, as the PEP doesn't give any. > > > > > > I was inferring that motivation <snip> > > > > So that others don't have to infer in the future, I've posted patch > > #1522038, which adds an explanation as to why these items are being > > removed.
(And this was checked in. I agree for sequenceIncludes which should be spelled as operator.contains. I guess operator.callable can go when callable goes.) > > Also, in case you (Guido) have changed your mind about removing > > operator.truth and operator.abs, I've also posted patch #1522059 which > > will remove them from the stdlib. > > I had forgotten I had posted this patch... > > I don't suppose you've changed your mind about removing operator.truth > and operator.abs in the seven months since this discussion? No, though I think that operator.truth should be renamed to operator.bool. I like the idea that for each built-in op there's a callable in operator. -- --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
