pre-PEP for optional 'pass'
Russell E. Owen
owen at nospam.invalid
Tue Apr 16 13:17:30 EDT 2002
In article <slrnabmoci.dhk.philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk>,
philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk (phil hunt) wrote:
>OK, I've decided to write a PEP. Preliminary to this, I'd like
>people's comments.
>
>I wish to make the pas startement optional. That is, in any Python
>program where there is a pass it can be left out and the meaning of
>the program is unchanged...
I'd go along with it and offer a third rationale:
The need for pass is a pain when commenting out entire blocks of code
(e.g. while debugging). Instead of just commenting out the code, one
must also add a "pass" statement, and then try to remember to take it
out again when re-enabling the code.
In my opinion an optional pass is a very good thing -- sometimes you
want to be able to assert "this block intentionally left blank", but
sometimes it makes more sense to just accept a truly empty block.
Thanks for proposing this. I'm sure you'll get lots of horrified
reactions (remember the fuss whenever someone suggests removing the
required colon at the start of blocks? Forgetting that damn colon is
still the most common mistake I make when coding Python, so I'd love to
see it go, but it'll be a cold day in hell...)
-- Russell
--
Return owen
address astro
garbled washington
in header edu
More information about the Python-list
mailing list