On Dec 4, 2019, at 16:04, David Mertz <me...@gnosis.cx> wrote: > > > Actually, I found it's rejected PEP: > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3136/. > > It looks like the first of several ideas there matches my ad hoc syntax. It > *was* 2007, in distant pre-walrus memory. But I'm not sure the SC would > revisit Guido's ruling.
Given that the PEP was incomplete (no implementation strategy, no argument for one of the options over the others), that its rationale had a lot of incorrect statements (like claiming that C, C++, and Ruby all have labeled break when none of them do, and C++ had recently rejected the idea), and that there’s no motivating example, maybe you could argue for a better version of the proposal to be reconsidered. On the other hand, except maybe for the last point, Guido already dismissed all of that and instead rejected it just because “code so complicated to require this feature is very rare”, and I don’t think you can really argue against that. (I mean, if you found tons of examples of stdlib and github code that could be improved by labeled break, that would actually constitute a good argument, but I don’t think it’s likely that you could find that much.)
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/7CNQWU33XS2FGM7253TJUQMRUJES3VWW/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
