On Feb 26, 2015 6:20 PM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Nathaniel Smith writes:
> > On Feb 26, 2015 9:33 AM, "Terry Reedy" <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > On 2/26/2015 11:15 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > >> Your argument seems to boil down to "no-one uses the prompt", so why not
> > >> just get rid of it?
> > > [Hardly.]
> > [I]f this is not an accurate summary of what you're trying to
> > argue, then I honestly have no idea what you are trying to argue.
> I'm surprised at "no idea". He's been clear throughout that because
> there are *many* alternative interactive interfaces besides the
> CPython interpreter itself, to be truly effective the warnings need to
> be propagated to those, and it's not automatic because most of them
> don't use the interactive interpreter. IIUC, at least in IDLE it's
> already possible to get them with some fiddling. Since it's debatable
> how important this is to interactive prompt users (especially those on
> POSIX systems), he thinks that to be effective it requires much more
> to change than just the CPython interpreter, and
Right, I think everyone can agree with all that.
> since it may annoy
> more users than would be helped, he doesn't seem to think the change
> is justified.
... But afaict Terry has not said one word of this; either I'm missing something or you're doing the same thing as random832 and filling in the gaps with guesses. Which is totally reasonable, natural language understanding always requires filling in gaps like this, and I'm not annoyed at anyone or anything
(maybe my last message came across as somewhat hostile? My apologies if so). Really I just think Terry should realize that they haven't been as clear as they think and elaborate, because I actually would like to know what they're saying.