Python 2.0

[Kumar Balachandran]

But it does allow you to forget an indentation or a blank line,
something that can happen very easily. The point I am trying to make
is to allow optional use if the user desires more readability, and to
accept whitespace if the user is from the planet Vulcan :-)

>>>>> "Charles" == Charles G Waldman <cgw at fnal.gov> writes:

    Charles> Kumar Balachandran writes:
    >> why not have optional syntactic sugar such as <snip>

    Charles> Because this introduces new keywords into the language,
    Charles> which nobody wants to do, especially if it introduces no
    Charles> new functionality.





>>>>> "Kumar" == Kumar Balachandran <kumar*xspam*@*xspam*rtp.ericsson.se> writes:

>>>>> "Graham" == Graham Matthews <graham at sloth.math.uga.edu> writes:

    Graham> Graham Matthews wrote in message
    Graham> <7ik6mi$lbk$1 at cronkite.cc.uga.edu>...  You are
    Graham> envangelising (a not uncommon response when someone
    Graham> remotely criticises Python). Stop evangelising and start
    Graham> considering the technical issues involve (read (!) other
    Graham> posts for what those issues are).
 
    Graham> graham
    Kumar> Here is some useful evangelizing (methinks). One of the
    Kumar> irritating things about Python is the use of whitespace in
    Kumar> syntax. Agreed, the code is readable without parentheses or
    Kumar> braces, but why not have optional syntactic sugar such as

    Kumar> if ...  elif ...  else ...  fi

    Kumar> def ...  ...  fed


    Kumar> while ...  elihw or wend



    Kumar> for ...  rof

    Kumar> etc. It makes the language more elegant. When I see code
    Kumar> using indentation or blank likes to achieve blocking of
    Kumar> constructs, it reminds me of an old language (FORTRAN I
    Kumar> think it was called:-).

    Kumar> The change is simple to achieve if backward compatibility
    Kumar> is given to accomodate people that grew up with FORTRAN.