> You have carefully avoided explicitly accusing me of making a straw man > argument while nevertheless making a completely irrelevant mention of > it, associating me with the fallacy.
I read that as him accusing you very directly. > That is not part of an honest or open discussion. > > Anders made a proposal for a change in syntax. I made a prediction of > the possible unwelcome consequences of that suggested syntax. In no way, > shape or form is that a straw man. You kept saying I was “forcing” to use the new syntax. You said it over and over even after we pointed out this was not the actual suggestion. This is classic straw man. But ok, let’s be more charitable and interpret it as you wrote it later: that it won’t be forcing per se, but that the feature will be *so compelling* it will be preferred at all times over both normal keyword arguments *and* positional arguments. For someone who doesn’t like the proposal you seem extremely convinced that everyone else will think it’s so super awesome they will actually try to force it on their colleagues etc. I like my proposal obviously but even I don’t think it’s *that* great. It would almost certainly become the strongly preferred way to do it for some cases like .format() and sending a context to a template renderer in web apps. But that’s because in those cases it is very important to match the names. / Anders _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
