Voting for PEP 308 (was Re: For review: PEP 308 - If-then-else expression)

[James J. Besemer]

Laura Creighton wrote:

> This is the logical order for people like you who want a ternary
> conditional that they will take whatever they can get, however ugly.
> The most important thing is getting it in, as long as it is not
> unreadable.  

It's unfair to ascribe that position to Eric or to other than a small 
minority of posters that I can see.

My sense of the many hundreds of posts is that most of the people who don't 
care what the construct looks like also don't care much if it gets in or not.

> But it is hellish for the people who have a beauty
> threshhold for any new language feature.  I don't suspect they are
> a small number.  [...]  Like any
> other 'third party' in a parliamentary procedure, why shouldn't they
> hold out for concessions on the 'beautiful' front?  

The trouble is, "beauty" is largely subjective and in this context generally 
simply boils down to a opinion about personal preferance.

That being said, I count myself both in the 'beauty' party and the pro-308 
camp.  I intend to vote against any proposal that is the least bit kludgy.

Regards

--jb

-- 
James J. Besemer		503-280-0838 voice
2727 NE Skidmore St.		503-280-0375 fax
Portland, Oregon 97211-6557	mailto:jb at cascade-sys.com
				http://cascade-sys.com