[Victor Stinner <vstin...@redhat.com>] > I'm not sure that the discussion on python-dev was really efficient (I > didn't follow the discussion on python-ideas). It seems like many > people said the same thing.
Only hundreds of times ;-) > I'm not sure that arguments of the supporters of the PEP have been > heard. Likely lost in the high number of emails... It's really the PEP's job to lay out the pros and cons - you shouldn't have to read emails at all for that, unless you want to follow the development in real time. I think moving the PEP from python-ideas to python-dev was premature, because even among proponents there wasn't yet consensus that the then-current state of the PEP was sufficiently focused. The simpler the PEP has gotten, the more I've warmed to it. My current +1 isn't really about the PEP as it stands, but about what I _assume_ Guido will be talking about (plain-name "binding expressions" alone, and not also, e.g., about changing some corner case scope behaviors, but also about tightening the language spec with respect to guaranteeing a specific order-of-operation (OOO) in some currently fuzzy cases - although, to be fair, both scope behaviors and OOO guarantees are issues on their own quite independent of this PEP). And, frankly, everyone else should be +1 too on whatever it is Guido is privately thinking ;-) _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
