[Guido]
I propose a moratorium on language changes. This would be a period of several years during which no changes to Python's grammar or language semantics will be accepted.
[Tim]
Eh. I'll be a solid +1 on this /if/ you use your time machine to begin the moratorium right after the "with" statement was introduced. The rationale you gave applied as much then as it does now -- and if you do this, then we won't need to discuss it now, since it will already have been done.
[Guido]
Well, my intention is for it to begin right after 3.1 was released.
Well, I believe that /was/ your intention.
While the time machine can do stuff with SVN or Hg branches, it's not powerful enough to mess with code already released.
LOL -- say that often enough, and the newbies might even believe it <0.6 wink>.
Though honestly I don't recall exactly what was added between the with statement and the 3.1 release apart from 'nonlocal'.
Excellent! My plan worked, then. I looked, and, e.g., both the switch statement and anonymous inline meta-decorators no longer exist in current Pythons. I can live with nonlocal -- its continued existence was probably just due to a local leak in the time machine's rear Tesla coils. They've always been a bit flaky.
If you won't use your time machine, fine, +0.
Ah, you've moved from fractional winks to fractional votes. A nice upgrade. :-)
I have no idea what you're talking about. the-more-things-change-the-more-i-don't-ly y'rs - tim