anything new on the ternary operator?

[Erik Max Francis]

Andreas Jung wrote:

> Please stop the discussion. The ternary operator is dead (which is a
> very
> good thing)
> because GvR made the decision.

There's not much doubt that the conditional operator will not be making
it into Python in the future, but just because the BDFL has made a
decree (although a significantly delayed one), it's a little naive to
think that discussion of it will not continue.  This clause was in the
PEP ("the subject better not come up again"), but I'm not sure how this
clause will really have much effect.  Obviously no more PEPs on the
subject will be accepted, and needless to say it won't be considered by
the development team in the future, but it seems weird to suggest that
because a PEP came up, was (after many months) indirectly rejected in a
presentation (the PEP is not even updated to show its rejected status),
that all users are precluded from discussing in the future.

Mind you, such discussion will not be very constructive, but just
saying, "Welp, it's not going to be added, nobody talk about it ever
again" is not going to be very effective when new people come in all the
time and, one must admit, at least some segment of the user community
would have liked the feature.

-- 
   Erik Max Francis && max at alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
 __ San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && &tSftDotIotE
/  \ I am a gentlemen:  I live by robbing the poor.
\__/  George Bernard Shaw