PEP 308: Helping Aahz to set up the ballot.

[James J. Besemer]

>> "Chermside, Michael" wrote:
>> 
>>So I am
>>volunteering to help Aahz out by making it easier for him to tell
>>what are the "important" syntaxes which belong on the ballot. 

I submit that this vetting has already been done by the authors of the PEP as 
presently written (and as possibly further revised before the vote).

Although Erik's list is interesting, I see no reason to confuse the issue 
with random alternatives that did not get incorporated into the PEP.  Most 
were crap and some were impossible.

E.g., the alternative "if c: t else: f" (without enclosing parens) is NOT a 
viable alternative specifically because Python's parser evidently cannot 
disambiguate it from the statement form.  (I, for one, predict humans 
similarly will be confused.)  No matter how much people like it, it's not 
really an option so there's no reason to include it in the vote.

Erik Max Francis wrote:

> I think suggesting for feedback via email on anything at this point is
> going to send the wrong message, despite your disclaimers.

Yes indeed.

I haven't seen it stated anywhere but my assumption is that we will be voting 
only on alternatives in the PEP.

Then too, BDFL would be within his rights to call for just an up or down vote 
on the PEP as is, which states only a single actual proposal.  As worded, the 
other alternatives are all rejected for one reason or another.

Regards

--jb

-- 
James J. Besemer		503-280-0838 voice
2727 NE Skidmore St.		503-280-0375 fax
Portland, Oregon 97211-6557	mailto:jb at cascade-sys.com
				http://cascade-sys.com