Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?

[Terry Reedy]

<bruno.desthuilliers at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1181475395.749525.185520 at m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| > Terry Reedy wrote:
| > > In Python, you have a choice of recursion (normal or tail)

[snip Stroud questions]

| I'm afraid Terry is wrong here, at least if he meant that CPython had
| tail recursion *optimization*.

NO!!!
I did not mean that or imply that in any way.

|  (and just for those who don't know yet, it's not a shortcoming, it's a
| design choice.)

And I already noted in a followup that I am working on a Python Papers 
paper explaining that choice, including Guido's claim that 'for statements 
are better'.

So frankly I am a little annoyed that you dragged my name into your answer 
to Stroud when you should have succintly said 'No, Never', or better, 
nothing at all, as someone else already did say that.  Read more of the 
tread before jumping in and acribing ignorance to people.

Terry Jan Reedy