[Python-Dev] What's the status of PEP 505: None-aware operators?

[Paul Moore]

On 28 November 2017 at 20:38, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2017, at 15:31, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Put me down for a strong -1.   The proposal would occasionally save a few keystokes but comes at the expense of giving Python a more Perlish look and a more arcane feel.
>
> I am also -1.

-1 from me, too.

>> One of the things I like about Python is that I can walk non-programmers through the code and explain what it does.  The examples in PEP 505 look like a step in the wrong direction.  They don't "look like Python" and make me feel like I have to decrypt the code to figure-out what it does.
>
> I had occasional to speak with someone very involved in Rust development.  They have a process roughly similar to our PEPs.  One of the things he told me, which I found very interesting and have been mulling over for PEPs is, they require a section in their specification discussion how any new feature will be taught, both to new Rust programmers and experienced ones.  I love the emphasis on teachability.  Sometimes I really miss that when considering some of the PEPs and the features they introduce (look how hard it is to teach asynchronous programming).

That's a really nice idea. I'd like to see Python adopt something
similar (even just as a guideline on how to write a PEP).

Paul