On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 9:55 PM, Łukasz Langa <lukasz@langa.pl> wrote:

> On 25 Apr, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
>
> You don't seem to grasp the usability improvements this will give. I hear you but at this point appeals to Python's "Zen" don't help you.

This reads dismissive to me. I did read the PEP and followed the discussion on
python-dev. I referred to PEP 20 because it distills what's unique about the
value proposition of Python. It's our shared vocabulary.

Perhaps so, but no PEP is chiselled in stone, and I would suggest that PEP 20 is the least authoritative from a didactic point of view.

Can you address the specific criticism I had? To paraphrase it without PEP 20
jargon:

> (name := expression) makes code less uniform. It inserts more information
> into a place that is already heavily packed with information (logic tests).

One could argue the same about list comprehensions if one chose: they make code denser (by expressing the same algorithm in a shorter spelling). I'm not sure what you mean by "less uniform."