Summary of PEP 308 Vote for a Ternary Operator

Stephen Horne intentionally at blank.co.uk
Tue Mar 11 12:39:03 CET 2003


On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 04:51:18 GMT, Tim Hochberg <tim.hochberg at ieee.org>
wrote:

>Again, I'd disagree. The results seems to slightly leaning toward some 
>ternary syntax, but no change seems to be preferred almost 2:1 (or 1.5:1 
>if you toss the fuzzy votes) over any particular syntax. I certainly 
>wouldn't characterize that as leaning towards accepting the PEP as proposed.

Over any *particular* syntax, yes - Raymonds choice of words may have
been imprecise. However...

1.  Overall, more people are pro-some-change than against-any-change.

2.  Of those who are pro-some-change, the current PEP308 syntax seems
    to be the first choice overall.

It seems that the vote has the worst possible type of outcome - it
could be interpreted as favoring either factions opinion. Either it
supports no change (as the no-change vote is more popular than any
single syntax) or it supports making a change (as, if the particular
syntax is considered a less important detail, the total votes for
change outweigh the total votes against).

Thankfully, we have a BDFL. The alternative might have involved
suicide bombers :-(





More information about the Python-list mailing list