PEP308: Yet another syntax proposal

[Erik Max Francis]

Andrew Dalke wrote:

> True.  But 1) this case in real code comes up very rarely (perhaps 1
> in
> 5,000 lines of code, based on my analysis) ...

You keep invoking the frequency argument.  I don't find it convincing. 
How often are Booleans used? metaclasses? generators? list
comprehensions?  There are plenty of features in Python that _are
already present_ that are used very rarely.  But when they are used,
they do their job with flying colors.

The question is whether or not _when it's used_ it serves its purpose. 
You may think that it is never useful, but clearly others don't.  Either
way, the frequency argument doesn't get either side anywhere.

A conditional operator or form should be short-circuiting, because it
simply doesn't make sense to go through the trouble of adding one that
doesn't.  Everyone knows that a non-short-circuiting conditional
function is utterly _trivial_.  Why bother adding it if it doesn't short
circuit, no matter how rare short circuiting is?

-- 
 Erik Max Francis / max at alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
 __ San Jose, CA, USA / 37 20 N 121 53 W / &tSftDotIotE
/  \ Whoever contends with the great sheds his own blood.
\__/ Sa'di
    Polly Wanna Cracka? / http://www.pollywannacracka.com/
 The Internet resource for interracial relationships.