On 11.02.16 19:40, Georg Brandl wrote: > On 02/11/2016 06:19 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > >>> Thanks for the alternate patch. I used the two-function approach you took >>> in ast.c for my latest revision. >>> >>> I still think that some cases (like two of the examples in the PEP, >>> 0b_1111_0000 and 1.5_j) are worth having, and therefore a more relaxed >>> rule is preferable. >> >> Should I write an alternative PEP for strong rule? > > That seems excessive for a minor point. Let's collect feedback for > a few days, and we can also collect some informal votes. I suspect that my arguments can be lost otherwise.
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