Summary of PEP 308 Vote for a Ternary Operator
The PEP 308 vote is summarized at: http://tinyurl.com/763f
Here are some of the highlights:
* 518 votes were received. Of these, 82 used a RejectAll ballot and 436 used the original ballot.
* 363 had a preferred syntax they found acceptable while 155 found no acceptable syntax.
* For the second ranked syntax, the ratio dropped to 286:231 in favor of a change. This means that 77 people found only one syntax to be acceptable.
* For the third ranked syntax, the ratio dropped to 202:312. This indicates that over half of the voters would prefer no change if they can't have one of their first two choices.
* The highest ranked constructs were:
235 for (if C: x else: y) 206 for C ? x : y
* The 235 breaks down to 177 accepting and 58 rejecting. If the RejectAll votes are attributed entirely to that syntax, the ratio becomes 177 favoring to 140 opposing.
* The individual votes were highly expressive and are worth reviewing:
* The write-in votes had more accepts than rejects but had no clustering of syntax preferences.
* The downfall of all voting systems is not in the data collection, rather it is in the way the rankings are combined. I avoid this issue by not declaring a winner. Instead, Guido is being given a straight tally and a copy of all of the individual votes. This works especially well because his vote outweighs all of the others.
* Though the results leans toward accepting the PEP as proposed, it is not decisive. Some of the no-change votes included strong pleas. This will certainly be a consideration.
* There were three or four ballots received after this summary was prepared but before it was posted. I'll include them for Guido in a separate email. Please stop sending in new votes.