Guido responded to my points thus: > > 1. Clarify the final statement - I seem to have the > > impression (sorry, can't find a message to back it up) > > that either the BDFL or Tim Peters is very against > > anything other than the "simple" #f.a = 1# sort of > > thing - unless I'm mischannelling (?) again. > > Agreed. That's a relief - I obviously had "heard" right! > > 2. Reference the thread/idea a little while back that ended > > with #def > f(a,b) having (publish=1)# ... > > Sure, reference it. It will never be added while I'm in charge > though. Well, I'd kind of assumed that, given my "memory" of the first point. But of the schemes that won't be adopted, that's the one *I* preferred. (my own sense of "locality" means that I would prefer to be placing function attributes near the declaration of the function, especially given my penchant for long docstrings which move the end of the function off-screen. But then I haven't *used* them yet, and I assume this sort of point has been taken into account. And anyway I definitely prefer your sense of language design to mine). Keep on trying not to get run over by buses, and thanks again for the neat language, Tibs -- Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/ "Bounce with the bunny. Strut with the duck. Spin with the chickens now - CLUCK CLUCK CLUCK!" BARNYARD DANCE! by Sandra Boynton My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)
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