RetroSearch Browse

Fri May 6 19:53:24 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053465.html

> > I'd be willing to break these off into a separate PEP if people
think
> > it's a good idea.  I've seen very few complaints about any of these
> > pieces of the proposal.  If possible, I'd like to see these things
> > approved now, so that the discussion could focus more directly on
the
> > block-statement issues.
> 
> I don't think it's necessary to separate this out into a separate PEP;
> that just seems busy-work. I agree these parts are orthogonal and
> uncontroversial; a counter-PEP can suffice by stating that it's not
> countering those items nor repeating them.

If someone volunteers to split it out for you, I think it would be
worthwhile.  Right now, the PEP is hard to swallow in one bite.
Improving its digestibility would be a big help when the PEP is offered
up to the tender mercies to comp.lang.python.

Raymond

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053465.html below:

[Python-Dev] Breaking off Enhanced Iterators PEP from PEP 340