On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14 March 2018 at 13:40, Søren Pilgård <fiskoma...@gmail.com> wrote: >> We can't remove all potential pitfalls, but I do think there is value >> in evaluating whether something has bigger potential to cause harm >> than the benefits it brings, especially if there are other ways to do >> the same. > > Certainly. However, in this case opinions differ (I, like Steven, have > no problem with implicit string concatenation, and in certain cases > prefer it over using explicit addition and relying on the compiler > optimising that away for me). > > Also, we need to consider the significant body of code that would > break if this construct were prohibited. Even if we were to agree that > the harm caused by implicit concatenation outweighed the benefits, > that would *still* not justify making it illegal, unless the net gain > could be shown to justify the cost of forcing every project that > currently uses implicit concatenation to change their code, debug > those changes, make new releases, etc. >
I guess that is why the proposal is to discourage the use, not removing it. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
