PEP 284, Integer for-loops

[Arthur Siegel]

>And please avoid the ad-hominems ("too lazy to learn the >language"), it
doesn't contribute to rational debate.

And I would beg you to amend your PEP to remove reference to novice users.
This has become the Mom and Apple Pie of PEP writers.  And I have yet to see
it in the context of the most straight forward meaning - to remove barriers
to learning to program for people motivated to learn to program.

Your evidence is derived from a specialized setting with a specialized
purpose - and not in a setting of  teaching Python programming tasks to
novices.  Your recent post makes that clear.  The PEP does not, and in fact
seems to imply otherwise.


At least at this point I think that the most important thing that could be
done on behalf of novice programmers is for the language to settle in for
some period as to all it basic syntactical structures. Reference books,
tutorials, and sample code are becoming too quickly obsoleted and there is
too much a sense of chasing a moving target.

I would submit, no change to the language I have seen proposed in a PEP does
*anything* significant *for* novices - and only adds to general static.

I don't know how to submit a PEP proposing *no* changes be made at this time
to basic constructs - the PEP I think that would best represent novice
interests. I can though ask PEP writers to be careful and thoughtful in
throwing in any reference to the interests of novices, without at least
explaining the basis - in some particulars - of the claim.

On the other hand, novices want to invest in learning a powerful, versatile
real world language - and are like the rest of the community, (reluctantly)
willing to live with any changes made to the language necessary to more
fully achieve that goal.
So fight it out, please, on that basis alone.

Please.

Art