On 31/10/2021 21:54, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2021, 5:39 PM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas 
PEP 671 will be USEFUL to Python programmers.  We want it!  (When do we want it?  Now!)

This feels dishonest. I believe I qualify as a Python programmer. I started using Python 1.4 in 1998. The large majority of my work life since then had been programming Python. I've written a bunch of books on Python. I was a director of the PSF.

I DO NOT want PEP 671, and do not feel it would be a net benefit to Python programmers.
Apologies.  I meant to use jocular language to emphasize my point.  Obviously that wasn't clear and you took me literally.  I accept that some people do not want this PEP.
Rob Cliffe

I am not on the SC, so indeed I won't make the decision. But I *will* continue to teach Python. New syntax adds a burden to learners, and it should not be introduced without sufficient benefit to merit that burden. This proposal does not come close to that threshold.

I was the first in this thread to propose a far more general capability that I think WOULD meet the cost/benefit balance... and I proposed it because I think there is a way to meet the niche need that also has wide enough application to warrant new syntax.

Python isn't Perl. Not every piece of syntax that *someone* might occasionally use for a narrow need should be included in the language.