On Mon, 2003-12-22 at 10:36, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I don't either, although my biggest problem with it is that it isn't > > clear just by looking what the punctuation actually means. I just > > fear this will be a permanent head scratcher. > > This argument by itself has very little value. The question isn't > whether it's self-describing (very few features beyond decimal > integers are); the question is whether it's easy to remember. There > are two subclasses of that: easy to remember what it means when you > next see it, and easy to remember how to spell it when you next need > it. IMO the dot syntax does fine here. Sorry, it was a pre-coffee argument. To me, the dot-syntax doesn't really tell me whether it forces a relative search or an absolute search. The dot tells me that something different is happening, so maybe when absolute is the default, it tells me there's a switch to relative searching going on. I'm not sure though, so I do think it may potentially fail the "easy to remember what it means when you next see it" test. OTOH, it would be nice to see a Greg Wilson-style newbie poll. > > Here's my entry in the sure-to-be-shot-down-by-the-BDFL-alternative > > -syntax game: > > There have been so many alternatives proposed this morning that I have > to spend some time comparing them all... Hopefully, this stuff will make it into the PEP so you don't have to troll through suggestions buried in endless email threads. -Barry
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