PEP scepticism

[phil hunt]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:26:14 -0400, Barry A. Warsaw <barry at digicool.com> wrote:
>The other purpose for PEPs -- IMO more important and often overlooked
>-- is to provide a concrete historical record for decisions made about
>the language, its implementations, and its environments.  Python's
>been around a long time, and as Tim is fond of saying, there are
>almost no new feature suggestions that haven't been brought up many
>times before.

Is there a PEP for multi-line comments?

Or one for making ``pass'' optional?

>I have a nagging feeling that `creeping featurism' is like pork-barrel
>politics.  In one breath people will decry the special interests that
>they don't like or don't care about, while in the next, ask for their
>own pet project to be funded. 

That could be a problem, yes.


-- 
==== Philip Hunt == philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk ====
Want to stop global warming? Do you support the Kyoto
Treaty? Then boycott Esso (ExxonMobil in the USA).
See www.stopesso.com for details.