Vote on PEP 308: Ternary Operator

[Anders Hammarquist]

In article <b3tfqc$5p8$1 at newshost.accu.uu.nl>,
Martijn Faassen <m.faassen at vet.uu.nl> wrote:

>Should I really need to figure out which of the options I
>dislike *least* and then give examples of them? And then reject them?
>Why do I need to put in all that effort when I just don't want any of them?
>Perhaps some people were rather focused on the PEP 308 discussions and thinks
>everybody voting wants to be caught up in them as well? Now I basically
>have to end up picking some from a list of ternary operator candidates,
>and then reject them, right? How are people who don't bother to spend
>this much time trying to figure it out going to figure it out? 

Hmm, there was the Q option (fill-in). So if nothing else, you can always
come up with 3 randomly horrendous syntaxes, and then reject those three. 
Of course, you also have to just how horrendous you syntax is...

/Anders

-- 
 -- Of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
Anders Hammarquist                                  | iko at cd.chalmers.se
Physics student, Chalmers University of Technology, | Hem: +46 31 88 48 50
G|teborg, Sweden.           RADIO: SM6XMM and N2JGL | Mob: +46 707 27 86 87