Attack a sacred Python Cow

[Russ P.]

On Jul 26, 11:22 pm, Terry Reedy <tjre... at udel.edu> wrote:
> Russ P. wrote:
> > On Jul 26, 2:25 pm, Terry Reedy
> >> There is a lot of code you have not seen.  Really.  In informal code I
> >> use 's' and 'o' for 'self' and 'other'.  I don't usually post such
> >> because it is not considered polite.  So you have seen a biased sample
> >> of the universe.
>
> > You take the name down to a single letter. As I suggested in an
> > earlier post on this thread, why not take it down to zero letters?
>
> Because 1 letter is legal now, while no letters (already proposed and
> rejected) is a major change and breakage of current simplicity and
> consistency for zero functional benefit.

Sorry, but I fail to see how it is a "major change." It only applies
to the first argument of a class member function, and the parser only
needs to look for an empty argument or a period. Furthermore, it would
break no working code.

It may indeed have been "proposed and rejected," but it would be a
nice way to clean up code in many areas, and as long as it cannot
break any working code, I think it should be reconsidered.