Modifying the {} and [] tokens

Terry Reedy tjreedy at
Sun Aug 24 01:46:42 CEST 2003

"Geoff Howland" <ghowland at> wrote in message
news:veefkvs764jl56ub2b0bt4cn4lekcv0mhf at
> In retrospect, I probably should have just not responded at all to
> thread portion that I felt that way about, as other people were
> me answers I thought were completely even.

An excellent idea (which I generally try to practice myself).

As for the Ruby suggestion: It is precisely because we are generally
pragmatists and not everyone-should-always-program-in-Python fanatics
that someone occasionally suggests that a particular person might
(repeat, might) find another language more suitable.  The canonical
example is people distressed by naked code unwrapped by redundant
braces.  If they can't adjust and won't use 'weaning' braces ('#{' and
'#}'), then they should use a language that better fits their mindset.

As for 'reasonable' idea rejection: There is effectively no limit to
what people can collectively think up, and as the community expands,
the number and breadth of ideas also expands.  One of Guido's main
jobs now is to reject most ideas for 'improvement', no matter how
'reasonable' in isolation.  If your particular wish should remain
ungranted a year from now, welcome to the club.

Terry J. Reedy

More information about the Python-list mailing list