just ignore Guido's "rejections" [Re: Alternative decorator syntaxdecision]
gyromagnetic at excite.com
Fri Aug 20 23:07:52 CEST 2004
Jeff Shannon wrote:
> Doug Holton wrote:
>> Anthony Baxter wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:50:18 -0500, Doug Holton <insert at spam.here>
>>>> We can safely ignore Guido's "rejections" when deciding upon an
>>>> alternative to agree upon. Many people felt his rejections of C1 (a
>>>> longtime community favorite), E1 and other alternatives were wrong.
>>> Uh, what? No, you _can't_ ignore Guido's rejections - if you really
>>> that you must have a form he's objected to, you need a _damn_ strong
>>> argument to back that up. A "longtime community favorite" doesn't mean
>>> a thing - this is language design, not American Idol - that a lot of
>>> like it makes no difference.
>> Um, yes. The point is to determine what the *community* decides on,
>> and *then* present that to Guido. You're just helpping confound this
>> second vote even more. Some people aren't voting for what they think
>> is best, but what they think Guido hasn't "rejected". That is
>> ridiculous. You'll end up with a syntax that nobody really ever liked
>> most, even Guido.
> On the other hand, if the community decides that the only thing they
> prefer to @pie is something that Guido's already rejected... then we get
> I can vote for Superman for president all I want, and I can talk all my
> friends into voting for him, but even if a majority of the country votes
> for Superman, he's still not gonna be taking any inaugural oath.
> Instead of voting for an impossible fantasy, it's much more sensible to
> restrict myself to voting for people/options with *some* chance of success.
> Keep in mind here, that what we're trying to do is vote for something
> for which we think we can create a convincing case that it's better than
> @pie. And Guido is the only person for whom "convincing" is relevant.
> If he's already rejected something, it will be *extremely* difficult to
> convince him that his rejection was a mistake. I'd rather focus my
> efforts where they're a little more likely to bear fruit.
> Jeff Shannon
> Credit International
>>If the community can *agree* on
>>> > something they can support, I will listen.
>> Even if it's -after-args?
If most people favor that over prefix @deco, sure, I'll give it
another look. (It better come with an implementation though.)
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-list