apardon at forel.vub.ac.be
Thu Jul 8 13:30:52 CEST 2004
Op 2004-07-07, Peter Hansen schreef <peter at engcorp.com>:
> ellisjb at my-deja.com wrote:
>> Reading the voting results I don't see why this was rejected. The way
>> I read it those in favor of some form of ternary operator seem to have
>> well over 50% of the vote.
> Answered at the top of the PEP, in the introduction:
> '''Following the discussion, a vote was held. While there was an
> overall interest in having some form of if-then-else expressions, no one
> format was able to draw majority support. Accordingly, the PEP was
> rejected due to the lack of an overwhelming majority for change.
> Also, a Python design principle has been to prefer the status quo
> whenever there are doubts about which path to take.'''
> Clear enough?
Not really. The question I have is whether the majority would
prefer an if-then-else expression in an other format than
there preference over not having an if-then-else expression.
If so then rejecting this PEP was not due to the lack of
an overwhelming majority for change.
More information about the Python-list