Damnation! (was: Re: Python3k extended grammar)

[jpb]

In article <cphfbtvk9p.fsf at cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com>, Guido van 
Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

>François Pinard <pinard at IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>
>> Roy Katz <katz at Glue.umd.edu> writes:
>> 
>> > 1. Python 3000 may be case-insensitive. 
>> 
>> Horror, hell, and damnation!  April 1st should be far behind us by now!
>> 
>> I would hate[1] writing with inconsistent casing, with nothing on my 
>> side
>> to help me writing consistently.  I much prefer what Python is, today, 
>> on
>> that regard.  So, how do I register my vote?  Where do I leave my tears? 
>> :-)
>
>Python is not a democracy.  Voting doesn't help.  Crying may... :-)
>
>> Besides, is there any real need behind case-insensitiveness?  Or is it
>> just another step forward (backward? :-) on that road that would drive 
>> us
>> towards a click-on-the-pink-button-and-hear-the-soft-sound version of 
>> Python?
>
>This is all taken way out of proportion.  I promise that Python 3000
>won't suddenly be introduced without further discussion.  Every issue
>will discussed here and elsewhere and we'll explain why we want to
>change the design.  We'll also explain what we're going to do for
>compatibility.
>
>In the mean time, we're too busy with Python 1.6 to be able to answer
>each question about Py3k.  Once 1.6 is released I promise to create a
>FAQ about Py3k.
>
>Some quick answers: for case insensitivity, we'll have tools that
>enforce consistent casing (and maybe the case insensitivity will be in
>the tools alone).

Please, let the insensitivity be in the tools, not the language.

jpb

-- 
Joseph Block <jpb at communiweb.net>
"Any government that is powerful enough to give you everything you want,
 is powerful enough to take away everything you have."
 - Barry Goldwater