PEP 285: Adding a bool type

[Laura Creighton]

Apology accepted.  It must be hard to work hard on something and find 
support luke-warm, at best.  Explanation: The reason that the article 
was so long was in part, because the people I asked for help in cutting 
it said that I should not cut it -- I realise now that asking Alex Martelli
for help in cutting an article is like asking the Atlantic Ocean
for help in 'Dryness' -- and in part because to understand my point
of view I need a response from the part of the brain that is not
concerned with symbolic manipulation and language.  I need a _pop_
from the visual cortex of your brain.  This was my research topic
before I abandoned efforts to get a phd and I can talk to you until 
we are all dead of old age about how to measure such reponses in people's 
brains, and what it means about thinking and the like, but you are 
already sick of words from me, so I won't.  But maybe some day over a 
few beers ...

However, you don't know me well enough to know that finding me 
afraid is cause for calling the newspapers ;-).  So I am not
afraid of your bools and my students, I just hate that it is
now going to be harder to teach students not to use them.  I
have a longer response outlining this as a reply to John Roth,
who also did not understand me, in case you want a rehash of the 
argument about why using bools is bad, in general, but I am damn 
close to positive you know all of that.  

I am just pleased that I did not make your 'people not worth
talking to list'.  That was the only bit that worried me.

Laura Creighton