PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative

holger krekel pyth at
Wed Feb 12 04:33:35 CET 2003

Beni Cherniavsky wrote:
> On 2003-02-11, holger krekel wrote:
> >         x and y else z
> >
> +10 since I thought of this independently!  I posted this couple weeks ago
> (it was deep inside a message about writing obfuscate reduce
> comprehensions and so went unnoticed; 

No, I think i read it.  I just rediscovered it or reapplied it, i guess.  
But participating in these PEP-308 discussions was/is kind of brain-washing
for good and for bad and thus i wasn't too sure of anything, anymore :-)

> besides, before the PEP the topic
> wasn't *so* hot :-).  I wanted to post it on Sunday, the moment I saw the
> PEP but I wanted to be a good citizen and read the threads first.
> Obviously I didn't get to post anything on Monday and Tuesday either :-).
> Now I got back to the newsgroup intending to post and what do I see?  The
> wonderful Python time machine strikes again!  My idea is already well
> accepted, even before I posted it <wink>!

There are quite some other strategies and who knows what comes
tommorow.  I guess it's all just a practice to show what would 
happen were we to design a language by debate.  We would definitely
win any newsgroup-traffic rating for some month after which we would
split etc.pp.  Or maybe not.  I really think that the discussions kept
a pretty good level so far although not in the eyes of the gods, maybe. 

But wait until we have to decide on the voting procedure which poses
an almost impossible to resolve bootstrapping problem :-)



More information about the Python-list mailing list