Steven D'Aprano firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 07:39:50PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
To its detriment: Making the interactive interpreter behave differently by default from the non-interactive interpreter should be resisted; code which behaves a certain way by default in one should behave the same way in the other, without extremely compelling justification.
The ship has sailed on that one. […]
Please note two things:
I don't claim there must be no differences, only that differences proposed today must come with compellign justification.
The fact that there are already differences doesn't justify diverging further. Whatever positive justification is offered, “they already diverge” cannot count for creating further divergence.