308 as a special case of 312 (was: Re: Pep 312 value)
Erik Max Francis
max at alcyone.com
Fri Feb 28 18:16:53 EST 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Fri Feb 28 18:16:53 EST 2003
- Previous message (by thread): 308 as a special case of 312 (was: Re: Pep 312 value)
- Next message (by thread): Found urllib strangeness with redirects - is this really a problem?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Paul Boddie wrote: > Erik Max Francis <max at alcyone.com> wrote: > > > PEP 312 merely seeks to shorten a previously existing syntax by > > exactly one > > keyword. > > That's why it appears even more frivolous than PEP 308. I wouldn't disagree with that in the slightest. That was exactly what I was expressing in my question about its validity. -- Erik Max Francis / max at alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/ __ San Jose, CA, USA / 37 20 N 121 53 W / &tSftDotIotE / \ That it will never come again is what makes life so sweet. \__/ Emily Dickinson WebVal / http://www.alcyone.com/pyos/webval/ URL scanner, maintainer, and validator in Python.
- Previous message (by thread): 308 as a special case of 312 (was: Re: Pep 312 value)
- Next message (by thread): Found urllib strangeness with redirects - is this really a problem?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list