from future import pass_function

Ulrich Eckhardt ulrich.eckhardt at
Thu Jul 26 13:45:23 CEST 2012

Am 26.07.2012 11:26, schrieb Steven D'Aprano:
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:59:30 +0200, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>> Am 26.07.2012 04:38, schrieb Steven D'Aprano:
>>> (Actually, I reckon that what is driving this idea is that the OP is a
>>> beginner, and he's got a syntax error a few times from writing
>>> "pass()", and so he thought it would be easier to force other people to
>>> change tens or hundreds of thousands of Python programs to use "pass()"
>>> instead of "pass" than to just learn to stop putting parentheses after
>>> it.
>> So, and in order to force people to write parens or break their code I
>> have considered the possibility of importing that feature from
>> __future__ for those people that want it? Seriously, Steven, as much as
>> I like your regular contributions here, this time you had better logged
>> off and taken a walk, because you come across as _very_ arrogant here.
> *shrug* I'm just being honest. As you admitted, you hadn't really given
> the idea a lot of thought. Your examples didn't show any difference
> except a pair of parentheses () after the pass. I made two guesses on
> what motivated your suggestion, based on the information I had in front
> of me at the time.
> By the way, you trimmed out my comment where I admit to also having come
> up with changes to Python without giving any thought to the consequences.
> My guesses as to your motive for wanting to change "pass" were not based
> on your thoughts, which are hidden to me, but on the way I used to think.

I didn't say "Pass should be a function!" but asked "What do you 
think?". You are assuming lots of things about my goals and jumping to 
conclusions like that I'm complaining about the stupid Python syntax, 
that I'm a frustrated noob, that I want someone to fix that syntax, but 
that is not the case! I'm engaging in a discussion here exactly in order 
to test the idea I had.

> It took me a long time to learn that, for an established language like
> Python, change is nearly always for the worse, and any change that
> requires changing existing code better have a very good excuse. what do you do when you have an idea? You think about it on your 
own, right? I do so, too, but I also engage in discussions with others. 
See? BTW: I think you missed the implications of this thread's topic and 
the snide remark about forcing people to change their code, i.e. that no 
existing code has to change (apart from the Python implementation, of 
course), even if pass was made a function!


More information about the Python-list mailing list