PEP 308: Results of "Helping Aahz set up the ballot"

[phil hunt]

On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:24:48 -0500, Michael Chermside <mcherm at destiny.com> wrote:
>Aahz:
>
>As you probably saw in a thread bearing your name, I took a
>quick simple poll (of those still bothering to follow the
>PEP 308 discussion). My reason for performing the poll was
>that I was seeing so many syntaxes discussed that I thought
>the key ideas were being burried in a wash of syntax options.
>
>I had 19 people casting votes, with the following results:
>(see 
><http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2003-February/148907.html>
>for interpretation of the syntax numbers):
>
>Syntax  # votes
>   11      12        x if C else y
>   14      10        C ? x : y
>   12       8        if C then x else y
>   13       8        if C: x else: y
>   18       7        C ?? x || y
>   22       6        C ? x else y
>   21       5        x when C else y
>
>Syntax  # votes       Syntax  # votes
>   16       3            15       1
>   23       2            17       1
>   24       2            26       1
>   25       2            27       1
>   28       2            31       1
>   38       2            34       1
>   39       2            36       1
>                         40       1
>
>You are welcome to do whatever you like with this information
>(including ignoring it completely), bearing in mind that it is
>not particularly . My own interpretation is simply that the
>"x if C else y" syntax (Guido's original) and "C ? x : y" (C
>syntax) both have a lot of support and should probably not be
>ignored

That's true.

It's interesting to not that the options that came 3rd and 4th were 
very similar to each other (suggesting that people who support one 
would also support the other, and that under a preference voting 
system such as AV or Condorcet, both would do well), and also 
similar to the existing Python conditional notation.

-- 
|*|  Philip Hunt <philh at cabalamat.uklinux.net>   |*|
|*|  "Memes are a hoax; pass it on"              |*|