RetroSearch Browse

Thu Feb 15 23:24:46 CET 2007 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/071205.html

glyph at divmod.com wrote:
 > > > I really, really wish that every feature proposal for Python had 
to meet
 > > > some burden of proof

Ben North wrote:
 > > This is what I understood the initial posting to python-ideas to be
 > > about.

glyph at divmod.com wrote:
 > I'm suggesting that the standards of the community in _evaluating_ to
 > the proposals should be clearer

Perhaps I didn't need to take your initial comments personally then,
sorry :-)

I do see what you're pointing out: the later part of the "dynamic
attribute" discussion was where the question of whether python really
needs new syntax for this was addressed, and the outcome made the
earlier discussion of "x.[y]" vs "x.(y)" vs "x.{y}" vs "x->y"
etc. irrelevant.

Ben.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/071205.html below:

[Python-Dev] Summary: rejection of 'dynamic attribute' syntax