[Python-Dev] Re: accumulator display syntax
pf_moore at yahoo.co.uk
Sat Oct 18 11:47:54 EDT 2003
Alex Martelli <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes:
> On Friday 17 October 2003 11:45 pm, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> In conclusion, I think this syntax is pretty cool. (It will probably
>> die the same death as the ternary expression though.)
> Ah well -- in this case I guess I won't go to the bother of deciding
> whether I like your preferred "lighter" syntax or the "stands our more"
> one. The sad, long, lingering death of the ternary expression was
> too painful to repeat -- let's put this one out of its misery sooner.
The saddest thing about the ternary operator saga (and it may be the
fate of this as well) was that the people who wanted the *semantics*
destroyed their own case by arguing over *syntax*.
I suspect that the only way out of this would be for someone to have
just implemented it, with whatever syntax they preferred. Then it
either goes in or not, with Guido's final veto applying, as always.
Possibly the same is the case here. Unless someone implements iterator
comprehensions, with whatever syntax they feel happiest with,
arguments about syntax are sterile, and merely serve to fragment the
discussion, obscuring the more fundamental question of whether the
semantics is wanted or not.
This signature intentionally left blank
More information about the Python-Dev