On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2000 gvwilson@nevex.com wrote:
> > legal? This would make the following 100% legal Python:
> >
> > i = 0
> > while i < 10:
> > print i & 1
> > i = i + 1
>
> Why? Whatever XML parser you use will output "i<1" as "i<1", so
> the Python that comes out of the XML parser is quite all right. Why change
> Python to do an XML parser job?
I totally agree.
To me, this is the key issue: it is NOT the responsibility of the
programming language to accommodate any particular encoding format.
While we're at it, why don't we change Python to accept
quoted-printable source code? Or base64-encoded source code?
XML already defines a perfectly reasonable mechanism for
escaping a plain stream of text -- adding this processing to
Python adds nothing but confusion. The possible useful
benefit from adding the proposed "feature" is exactly zero.
-- ?!ng
"This code is better than any code that doesn't work has any right to be."
-- Roger Gregory, on Xanadu
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