On Jul 12, 2018, at 09:23, INADA Naoki <songofaca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, the PEP has improved significantly since that time. My guess is the 
>> same poll taken now could give an opposite result.
> I still -0 on PEP 572.  But strong -1 on restart discussion about changing it.
> We should polish and implement it for now, not change.

I think that’s likely true.  While extremely painful for so many of us, I think 
the end result is a much better PEP, and a much better feature.  I was -1 as 
well, but I’d say I’m a firm +0 now[*].  I like how many of the problematic 
syntactic and semantic issues have been narrowed and prohibited, and I can see 
myself using this sparingly.  It’s not the first time I’ve found myself in this 
position with a new Python feature, and it’s one of the reasons I deeply trust 
Guido’s intuition and sensibilities.


[*] Not that it matters; the PEP is accepted - time to move on!  The world 
won’t end. :)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Python-Dev mailing list

Reply via email to