[Python-Dev] What's the status of PEP 505: None-aware operators? (original) (raw)

Joao S. O. Bueno jsbueno at python.org.br
Wed Nov 29 13:14:13 EST 2017

On 28 November 2017 at 18:38, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

On Nov 28, 2017, at 15:31, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote:

Put me down for a strong -1. The proposal would occasionally save a few keystokes but comes at the expense of giving Python a more Perlish look and a more arcane feel. I am also -1. One of the things I like about Python is that I can walk non-programmers through the code and explain what it does. The examples in PEP 505 look like a step in the wrong direction. They don't "look like Python" and make me feel like I have to decrypt the code to figure-out what it does. I had occasional to speak with someone very involved in Rust development. They have a process roughly similar to our PEPs. One of the things he told me, which I found very interesting and have been mulling over for PEPs is, they require a section in their specification discussion how any new feature will be taught, both to new Rust programmers and experienced ones. I love the emphasis on teachability. Sometimes I really miss that when considering some of the PEPs and the features they introduce (look how hard it is to teach asynchronous programming).

Oh well, I would be +1 on patching PEP 1 for that.

Cheers, -Barry

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list