June 29, 2004
12:45 p.m.
"Jewett, Jim J" <jim.jewett@eds.com> writes:
Jeff Bone:
Yet --- true, but only if one accepts a particular and rather simple-minded and overly-literal interpretation of the ***GOALS*** of PEP 318,
That simple-minded and overly-literal interpretation may well be correct.
PEP 318 does not intend to change the semantics or capabilities of the language in any way whatsoever.
I just want to point out that Guido has been basically silent ever since this discussion re-started and it has now degenerated into a mostly-philosophical debate. I suggest it might be worth waiting for him to respond before it spirals any further away from what was asked for :) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com