PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative
Paul Rubin
http
Tue Feb 11 15:49:39 EST 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Tue Feb 11 15:49:39 EST 2003
- Previous message (by thread): PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative
- Next message (by thread): PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
holger krekel <pyth at devel.trillke.net> writes: > Inspired by "do the simplest thing that can possibly work" > i now think that > > x and y else z > > might just do it and avoid the need for a new construct. > It's a very minor change just for fixing the problem at hand. > It should be obvious what it does. I find it very confusing and don't think I'd ever get used to it. I really dislike that type of cutesy-ness that is sometimes found in Python (the % string operator is another example). In fact it's not even obvious what it does. What should the value of (2 and 0 else 3) be?
- Previous message (by thread): PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative
- Next message (by thread): PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list