308 as a special case of 312 (was: Re: Pep 312 value)

[Erik Max Francis]

Paul Boddie wrote:

> Erik Max Francis <max at alcyone.com> wrote:
>
> > PEP 312 merely seeks to shorten a previously existing syntax by
> > exactly one
> > keyword.
> 
> That's why it appears even more frivolous than PEP 308.

I wouldn't disagree with that in the slightest.  That was exactly what I
was expressing in my question about its validity.

-- 
 Erik Max Francis / max at alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
 __ San Jose, CA, USA / 37 20 N 121 53 W / &tSftDotIotE
/  \ That it will never come again is what makes life so sweet.
\__/ Emily Dickinson
    WebVal / http://www.alcyone.com/pyos/webval/
 URL scanner, maintainer, and validator in Python.