PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative

[holger krekel]

Erik Max Francis wrote:
> holger krekel wrote:
> 
> > Inspired by "do the simplest thing that can possibly work"
> > i now think that
> > 
> >         x and y else z
> 
> If you're going to go this route, I'd much prefer not overloading the
> meaning of `and' here, and using something like
> 
> 	C then x else y
> 
> (which has been previously suggested).

If adding a keyword is an option then i agree.  I don't claim
that my idea is "new" or anything [tm]-like, btw.  It just reflects
my viewpoint on the whole "minor feature" issue and is certainly
just a recap/combination of previous thoughts. 

But i suspect it doesn't matter much which route i (or almost
anyone else for that matter) likes to go, anyway.  The exception
beeing you-know-who. 

cheers,

    holger