jbauer at rubic.com
Thu Aug 26 18:15:57 CEST 1999
I think this proposal would break too much existing
code, even for a Python 2 change.
Arguably, it may not be the best coding style, but I've
gotten used to functions returning None, if not otherwise
specified. If your proposal could be guaranteed to
generate a compile-time error (could it?), it might
encounter less resistance, but I still wouldn't be
very enthusiastic about the idea. I can appreciate
the issue you're addressing, though.
Paul Prescod wrote:
> I think it would be more pythonish if this would return a runtime
> (or even compiletime) error:
> def foo():
> It shouldn't just return None. That's a source of errors.
> This is obviously an incompatible change so I propose it
> for Python 2.
More information about the Python-list