data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a9ad/6a9ad89a7f4504fbd33d703f493bf92e3c0cc9a9" alt=""
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 03:15:32AM +0100, Rob Cliffe wrote:
Why do people keep obscuring the discussion of a PEP which addresses Problem A by throwing in discussion of the (unrelated) Problem B? (Chris, and I, have stated, ad nauseam, that these *are* unrelated problems.
Chris says: "Even if Python does later on grow a generalized lazy evaluation feature, it will only change the *implementation* of late-bound argument defaults, not their specification." So you are mistaken that they are unrelated. Chris could end this debate (and start a whole new one!) by going to the Python-Dev mailing list and asking for a sponsor, and if he gets one, for the Steering Council to make a ruling on the PEP. He doesn't *need* consensus on Python-Ideas. (Truth is, we should not expect 100% agreement on any new feature.) But any arguments, questions and criticisms here which aren't resolved will just have to be re-hashed when the core devs and the Steering Council read the PEP. They can't be swept under the carpet. -- Steve