On Monday 08 March 2004 03:46 pm, Skip Montanaro wrote: > I guess this is an area where PEP 318 should be fleshed out a bit. I > don't see any reason it shouldn't be expanded to include semantics as well > as syntax. That might require a title change, but I don't think the > semantics should be left unspecified, nor do I think the syntax and > semantics should reside in separate PEPs. Agreed; the sematics should be included in the PEP. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> PythonLabs at Zope Corporation
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4