On 6/27/06, Robin Bryce <robinbryce at gmail.com> wrote: > > PEP 3103, When to Freeze the Dispatch Dict/Option 1 > > 2 things resonated with me for Raymond's proposal and the follow up: > > - It seemed agnostic to almost all of the independently contentious issues. Except for the need to use named constants. > - "is defined tightly enough to allow room for growth and elaboration over > time" [Raymond]. In particular it left room for > const/static/only/cached/etc to come along later. > > I think its worth acknowledging this in the PEP. Search for Raymond's name. It's there. > Is nothing better than something in this case ? I don't know. > > > I think we need a PEP for const/static/only/cached/precomputed or > > whatever people like to call it. > > > > Once we have (say) static, I think making the case expressions static > > by default would still cover all useful cases, and would allow us to > > diagnose duplicate cases reliably (which the if/elif chain semantics > > don't allow IIUC). > > If the expectation is that static/const will evolve as a sibling pep, > does this not make Raymond's suggestion any more appealing, even a > little ? No, then School Ia becomes more appealing. Raymond's proposal is unpythonic by not allowing expressions. > Is it unacceptable - or impractical - to break the addition of switch > to python in two (minor version separated) steps ? But what's the point? We have until Python 3000 anyway. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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