PEP308: Yet another syntax proposal

[Aahz]

In article <mailman.1044919572.12514.python-list at python.org>,
James J. Besemer <jb at cascade-sys.com> wrote:
>Aahz wrote:
>> Dave Brueck  <dave at pythonapocrypha.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Short-circuit evaluation is never "necessary" in _any_ language - it's
>>>just very, very useful sometimes. Python's 'and' operator doesn't _have_
>>>to be a short-circuit operator, but it's far more useful because it is.
>> 
>> "Far more useful", eh?  You need to argue that, not just claim it.
>
>This has been asked and answered many times.

Not yet.  So far, I haven't seen a clear justification for making this a
language-level change.

>Or are you saying Python would be better if it's 'and' and 'or' did not
>short circuit?

Not in the slightest.  I *am* saying that I think that any code that
depends on short-circuit evaluation probably should have more of a
visual marker.  
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

Register for PyCon now!  http://www.python.org/pycon/reg.html