Modifying the {} and [] tokens

[Geoff Howland]

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:46:42 -0400, "Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at udel.edu>
wrote:

>An excellent idea (which I generally try to practice myself).

It's a work in progress on my side.  :)

>As for the Ruby suggestion: It is precisely because we are generally
>pragmatists and not everyone-should-always-program-in-Python fanatics
>that someone occasionally suggests that a particular person might
>(repeat, might) find another language more suitable.  The canonical
>example is people distressed by naked code unwrapped by redundant
>braces.  If they can't adjust and won't use 'weaning' braces ('#{' and
>'#}'), then they should use a language that better fits their mindset.

Agreed.

>As for 'reasonable' idea rejection: There is effectively no limit to
>what people can collectively think up, and as the community expands,
>the number and breadth of ideas also expands.  One of Guido's main
>jobs now is to reject most ideas for 'improvement', no matter how
>'reasonable' in isolation.  If your particular wish should remain
>ungranted a year from now, welcome to the club.

I'm glad that he is limiting things.  Perhaps my plan would not have
worked out well anyway, but I was interested in giving it a shot.
Since it's not possible, I'll think up some other less hacky slightly
more verbose way to handle the issues.


-Geoff Howland
http://ludumdare.com/