Status of PEP's?

[Bjorn Pettersen]

> From: David Eppstein [mailto:eppstein at ics.uci.edu] 
> 
> In article <mailman.1014990243.30815.python-list at python.org>,
>  "Bjorn Pettersen" <BPettersen at NAREX.com> wrote:
> 
> > Of course, if anyone actually cared about this syntax, we 
> would have a 
> > PEP with a pro/con section, so we wouldn't have to 
> reiterate the same 
> > arguments over and over again <wink>
> 
> I was starting to think it might be time to write a PEP,
> but then Tim's comment about how he dislikes iterating over 3 
> discouraged me.

I would still encourage you to write a PEP, especially if you think this
should be implemented instead of PEP 276. I believe even Tim can be
convinced by a superior argument -- besides it's not like we get to vote
on the PEPs anyway <wink>. 

-- bjorn