Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 5:20 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> Except that "yield from" is used by generators to delegate to other

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 5:20 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> Except that "yield from" is used by generators to delegate to other >> generators, and "await" is used by coroutines to delegate to other >>

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Ian Kelly

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >>> I was not referring to the possible future use of yield from for async

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >> I was not referring to the possible future use of yield from for async >> generators; I was referring to the possibility *today* of using "yield >>

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: > I was not referring to the possible future use of yield from for async > generators; I was referring to the possibility *today* of using "yield > from" as a synonym for *await*. As far as I know the only major > obstacle to

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >>> Not one of these is syntactically invalid. Why should "else without >>> break" be trapped by the parser? Your other examples mostly have good >>>

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 8 Nov 2017 04:28 am, Ian Kelly wrote: > >> Steve's manufactured interactive example ("manufactured" because >> who really uses for-else interactively? If I really care that much >> about output formatting

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Wed, 8 Nov 2017 04:28 am, Ian Kelly wrote: > Steve's manufactured interactive example ("manufactured" because > who really uses for-else interactively? If I really care that much > about output formatting I'm going to put it in a script). Me. As I have said. I really don't appreciate you

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: > All of these are things that a linter should probably catch and warn > about. If you had said that the break syntax suggestion was a good > idea but probably better suited as a linter warning than as a > SyntaxError

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> Maybe we're not defending the abuse of other contributors. Maybe

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Jon Ribbens >> wrote: >>> On 2017-11-04, Ben Finney

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Jon Ribbens > wrote: >> On 2017-11-04, Ben Finney wrote: >>> To respond to the criticism of an idea – criticism containing no

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > Ian Kelly writes: > >> Please stop defending the use of incivility on this list. > > Please stop conflating people, who deserve civility, with ideas. We must > not allow the civility deserved

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On 2017-11-04, Ben Finney wrote: >> To respond to the criticism of an idea – criticism containing no mention >> of the person – as though it “clearly refers to the [person]”, is of >>

Re: Ideas about how software should behave (was: replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`)

On 2017-11-04, Ben Finney wrote: > To respond to the criticism of an idea – criticism containing no mention > of the person – as though it “clearly refers to the [person]”, is of > significant concern on a software dicussion forum such as this. No, the thing that is