On 29.06.2014 15:37, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 29 Jun 2014 23:00, "Hernan Grecco" email@example.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 2:19 AM, Nick Coghlan firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On that last point, one of my goals at SciPy next month will be to encourage folks in the scientific community that are keen to see something resembling block support in Python to go hunting for compelling *use cases*. The fatal barrier to proposals like PEP 403 and 3150 has long been that there are other options already available, so the substantial additional complexity they introduce isn't adequately justified. The two main stumbling blocks:
What is the status of PEP 3150? I remember reading that you were withdrawing 3150 in favor of 403 but this is not reflected in http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3150/.
I see merit in both alternatives, so I still update both of them occasionally. I did withdraw 3150 at one point, but I later figured out a possible solution to the previously fatal flaw in its namespace handling semantics and moved it back to Deferred.
It is still written in the abstract of 403 that 3150 was withdrawn.
p.s.: while I’m at it, in the “Explaining Decorator Clause Evaluation and Application”, 3150 is missing a ?, I think, and in the “Out of Order Execution” section there seems to be a markup issue after the second code block
I tend not to announce any updates to either of them, since they'll remain pure speculation in the absence of clear use cases where they would provide a compelling readability benefit over the status quo.
Hernán _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Pythonemail@example.com https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Python-ideas mailing list Pythonfirstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/