On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:25 AM, Raymond Hettinger < raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It probably is the wrong time and probably can hurt (by introducing > divisiveness when we most need for be focusing on coming together). > > This PEP also shares some traits with PEP 572 in that it solves a somewhat > minor problem with new syntax and grammar changes that affect the look > and feel of the language in a way that at least some of us (me for example) > find to be repulsive. > > This PEP is one step further away from Python reading like executable > pseudo-code. That trait is currently a major draw to the language and I > don't think it should get tossed away just to mitigate a minor irritant. > +1. Also this whole none-aware problem is really really complicated, so I'd like to add a few thoughts: 1. I spent a few days on it last year, and came to the following conclusions: 2. It is a *really* useful feature -- that I want in quite a lot of code that I write. 3. The problem is way deeper than simply adding '?.' and other operators. For real use cases, you also need to say "how far" the an operator can "spread" -- and this is real hard to solve. 4. Coming up with a readable syntax that doesn't look like line noise is really hard; and very subjective. Based on all that, I have to agree -- now is not the time to try to resolve these issues, there are more important issues to resolve -- I'll write more on that tomorrow.
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
