On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 01:03:54PM -0600, Abe Dillon wrote: > I don't understand the rationale behind PEP 463's rejection. Guido says, "I > disagree with the position that EAFP is better than LBYL, or "generally > recommended" by Python. (Where do you get that?...";
I can't comment on Guido's question about "generally recommended", but as for the first part, I agree: neither EAFP nor LBYL is "better", they are both appropriate under different circumstances. Sometimes one is clearer and more efficient than the other. The only time I would say that EAFP is clearly better is when LBYL introduces "Time Of Check To Time Of Use" bugs. > Which brings me to the question: What happens when a PEP gets rejected? Is > it final? Is there a process for reviving a PEP? Nothing is final-final. You can try opening a competing PEP, or take over as champion of the existing PEP (assuming Chris is willing to step aside). You ought to respond to the reasons given in the rejection. It's probably a good idea to gauge the chances of success by asking on Python-Ideas and Python-Dev first, to avoid the core devs saying "Oh give it up, it's not going to happen!" after you've wasted time trying to revise a rejected PEP. [...] > I think the colon (and maybe > 'except' keyword) could be replaced with an exclamation point: > > value = lst[2] except IndexError! "No value" [...] > if that appeases the people who dislike the over-use of colons. And I think that this is precisely the sort of syntax that prompted Guido to write many years ago that language design is not merely a problem-solving exercise. Aesthetics are important. This is not just a matter of finding an unused character or two and hammering it into the the language. That's how you get Perl, which is not a pretty language. > A full exception list would have to be in parentheses which get's ugly, but > would also be (I would wager) a less common form: > > dirlist.append(os.getcwd() (AttributeError, OSError as e)! os.curdir) > > That might need some work. I don't know if it's compatible w/ the compiler. > It may have to start with "try" or something, but it seems pretty close to > a workable solution. Seeing that syntax, the phrase that came to my mind was not so much "close to workable" and more "kill it with fire!". -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
