Serhiy Storchaka storchaka at gmail.com
Thu Feb 11 13:29:15 EST 2016

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 515: Underscores in Numeric Literals
• Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Duelling PEPs not needed [was: PEP 515: Underscores in Numeric Literals]
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On 11.02.16 19:40, Georg Brandl wrote:
> On 02/11/2016 06:19 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>
>>> Thanks for the alternate patch.  I used the two-function approach you took
>>> in ast.c for my latest revision.
>>>
>>> I still think that some cases (like two of the examples in the PEP,
>>> 0b_1111_0000 and 1.5_j) are worth having, and therefore a more relaxed
>>> rule is preferable.
>>
>> Should I write an alternative PEP for strong rule?
>
> That seems excessive for a minor point.  Let's collect feedback for
> a few days, and we can also collect some informal votes.

I suspect that my arguments can be lost otherwise.

---

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 515: Underscores in Numeric Literals
• Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Duelling PEPs not needed [was: PEP 515: Underscores in Numeric Literals]
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list