Returning none

[Gordon McMillan]

> [Skip Montanaro]
> > If Tim gave it as an example, he's probably used it in his own code
> > somewhere with good reason <wink>, but anybody else caught
> > programming that way ought to be shot.
[Tim] 
> Let's generalize that:  everyone other than Tim should be shot
> period.
> 
> Oh, all right.  Everyone other than Tim and Skip.  Not sure about
> Guido. Ya, OK, him too.  Gordon?  Eeeeew, I can't really recommend
> *killing* him with a clear conscience.  That tears it!  Nobody gets
> shot, everybody lives.

Saved the world before breakfast yet again. Damn, I better shave 
before the reporters get here. Oops, too late. Hi guys, you remember 
the rules - don't park in the petunias and don't track dog shit into 
the house...

> Let's shift the ground of the debate:  I'd bet Guido's life that
> this won't go into 1.6, and I think most long-timers would agree
> with that regardless of their opinion of the technical merits pro or
> con (new keyword?!  more likely Tom Christiansen posts 10 energetic
> msgs bemoaning the lack of Python docs in PowerPoint format <wink>).
>  But what about Python2?  If there were a clean way to plug the hole
> in that, would you object?

As already noted, I _hate_ the explicit distinction of "functions" 
and "procedures"; I would _hate_ to have to explicitly discard 
unwanted results. Michael Hudson's hacks have a certain amount of 
appeal, but that's without seeing what the further consequences are.

> Having asked that, I think I at least halfway object to the very
> question, since it's a distraction from attacking much bigger
> insecurities.
> 
> leap-over-a-glass-shard-and-land-in-a-bear-trap-ly y'rs  - tim

I _told_ you not to park in the petunias.

- Gordon