Confused about pep 318

[Edward K. Ream]

> Look, you keep insinuating that there was some sort of evil plot to slip
> this into Python. I can assure you that this is NOT true, and I'm getting
> more than a little bit fed up with this argument.

I have never said any such thing, nor did I mean to insinuate any such
thing.  I have stated, loudly and often, that no proper public notice of
recent changes has been made.  I stand by that statement.

> "Actively mislead the public"? What the hell is that supposed to mean?

The fact is that somebody like me, with a big interest in '@', would
naturally conclude, on the basis on reading pep 318, that pep 318 has
nothing to do with '@'.   Moreover, one would conclude, on the basis on
reading pep 318, that the pep wasn't even close to a final design, much less
an implementation.

That is what I meant, and _all_ that I meant, by the phrase "actively
misleading".

Edward
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Edward K. Ream   email:  edreamleo at charter.net
Leo: Literate Editor with Outlines
Leo: http://webpages.charter.net/edreamleo/front.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------