Any other Python flaws?

[Steve Holden]

"Andrew Kuchling" <akuchlin at mems-exchange.org> wrote in message
news:mailman.992543370.22014.python-list at python.org...
> I was updating my page of possible Python design flaws
> (http://www.amk.ca/python/writing/warts.html) last night to take 2.1
> into account.  2.1's nested scoping fixes one major wart, and the
> other major one, the type/class dichotomy, might get fixed in 2.2 if
> the descr-branch in CVS turns out well.  (It's neat that the two
> largest ones may both get fixed before 2001 is out.)
>
> That leaves the remaining warts as minor wibbling about 'do'
> statements, print >>, and the like.  Are there any other flaws that
> should be added?
>
Despite the fact that our Fearless Leader and BDFL has already revered
himself once on this issue, I'd like to see strict syntactical equity
between function definitions and class definitions, which is to say that a
class with no superclasses should be declarable as:

    class myClass():
        pass

Surely this can be made an *optional* syntax. In that case, no existing code
breaks and I can't see the harm .. except possibly to Guido's pride, and I
can think of two reason why that wouldn't count.

1. Guido has shown a remarkable lack of ego in the development process (as
far as I know of it) thus far, and probably wouldn't really care, and

2. If 1. is false, the time machine could be used to ensure that the
interpreter had never done anything else.

regards
 Steve