For review: PEP 308 - If-then-else expression

[Arthur]

Aahz writes -

>Here's an excellent post by Mark Lutz from python-dev.  Mark spends much of
his time teaching Python, so he's in a good position to evaluate how new
features impact >the ease of learning and using the language:

>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-February/032983.html

I appreciate the cite, and its authoritative source.

Python as a language with a distinctive "voice" - some of us feel -  is
compromised by changes that simply  - or primarily - add alternative ways of
accomplishing things hat are already quite readily accomplished .  And it is
difficult for someone like myself to see what other than that distinctive
voice can be argued  to make Python  significant - that is significant in
some way beyond its usefulness to its currently existing user base.  Many of
whom were originally attracted to it by its distinctive -  what,
minimalism?

But as Mark says - and I think we all appreciate -  this is an old battle.
And its hard to find anything new to be said on the subject.

And nobody seems to be swaying nobody.

Also happen to think it would be great to be able to walk into Barnes and
Noble and buy a book on Python - as it stands - at some point.

I've recently paid a visit looking for a Linux distro.  In the past there
had been many options for books with CDs of Linux distros.  My unscientific
survey seems to  conclude that Barnes and Noble have made a decision to get
out of that business.  Too many Redhat 7.3 books on hand when 8.0 comes out.
And its been going on for too long now. Obviously this happens to some
extent across the board as to computer books.  It s just a matter of degree,
and the $ impact.

My same unscientific survey seems to be finding less shelf space for Python
books.  And I am speculating that versioning issues have played its part
here as well.  Because people - like myself - are reluctant to buy something
we know cannot be considered authoritative. And the fact that this may be an
irrational impulse - a 2.0 book is 97% authoritative - doesn't change it.
Who said people act fully rationally as to these things.

Which is part of Mark's point - it seems to me.

Not wanting to accommodate my - and other peoples - irrationality, to the
extent that what it is, is understandable.  But perhaps unwise, depending -
I guess - on what it is one is trying to accomplish.

Art