Re:Pattern matching accepted for Python
by hnlmorg on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @11:37AM
(#26091387)
> This thread was just about the two alternatives (the PEP and explicit capture), not about the PEP in general, or about defending the PEP or even saying that the better alternative is "good". We just say it's better than the PEP. Not sure how you read that into what we wrote.
Bullshit. You said, and I quote, "There are 100s of things in Python who would be confusing". That's what I was responding to. And my point stands: just because there are other pain points in Python doesn't mean we should accept more pain points into it.
> Then go make that argument in some thread in this post discussing the PEP proposal in general?
I’d prefer to make that argument in the thread where I was already talking you about the PEP proposal in general. ;)
This thread was just about the two alternatives (the PEP and explicit capture), not about the PEP in general, or about defending the PEP or even saying that the better alternative is "good". We just say it's better than the PEP. Not sure how you read that into what we wrote.
>Disclaimer: I'm a language designer myself so I know first hand how hard it is to get these things right.
Then go make that argument in some thread in this post discussing the PEP proposal in general?