What has PEP 285 done to us?

[Boris Borcic]

Oleg Broytmann wrote:

> 
>    I do not think the PEP *did* damage - it only revealed that our
> community has problems. I don't understand what problems.


Well, let's list PLDPs - Python-List Diagnostics Proposals - and then 
vote on them :)

A couple to get the ball rolling :

(a) Bool himself first viewed boolean algebra as the "laws of thought", 
a perception that some boolean lawyers verisimilarly share. And clearly 
a BDFL's position becomes more difficult when his work touches to what 
others percieve as their working laws of thought, whatever the realities.

(b) Laura made a lengthy point, overlooking the improvable while clear 
to the language designer's POV, that it very much boiled down to : "I've 
stacked my didactics of truth values in Python on the name of None, and 
the PEP makes me feel I've been telling lies". Which certainly amounts 
to something of a valid point, but it should be understandable to 
anybody that a designer can't be overly patient with what he can't help 
percieving as trying to imprison him in his own shadow while making it 
look at length as if he'd failed to understand... what he knows to be 
his own mind, and stateable in a few words.

(c) note that the ordinal of the PEP was a bad omen. Note how the three 
digits of

     285, actually mimic the three letter of
     RHS, a well known acronym for
     "Right Hand Side", itself not an inspiration for democrats.

Regards, Boris Borcic
--
python >>> filter(lambda W : W not in "ILLITERATE","BULLSHIT")