"as" keyword woes

[alex23]

On Dec 4, 3:42 pm, "Warren DeLano" <war... at delsci.com> wrote:
> So you prefer broken code to broken rules, eh?  Your customers must love
> that!  This is exactly the kind of ivory-tower thinking I feared might
> be behind the decision (form over function, damn the users to hell,
> etc.)

Really? I find that believing something should remain static at the
expense of actual improvement to the language is far more 'ivory-tower
thinking' than embracing change.

> Am I the only one picking up on the irony here?  "as" exists largely to
> provide a mechanism for working around namespace conflicts -- except,
> apparently, conflicts involving "as".  The fact that "as" itself creates
> an insurmountable namespace collision is just killing me!  How absurd.

Speaking of irony, you're complaining about namespace conflicts with a
-two character identifier- you've chosen. Here's a hint: choose better
names.

> But to be brutally honest...in this many-core world we must all accept
> and deal with today, it is hard to imagine how a non-multithreaded AND
> non-backwards compatible Python implementation can have much of a life
> ahead of it, with or without an "as" keyword.  I do sincerely hope I am
> wrong about this, but it is seems quite possible that C/Python's glory
> days are now behind us.  

To match your honesty, I'm somewhat tired with the trend of some
people to hit -one- issue with Python and suddenly lash out like
children over all the same old tired crap. Have you even looked at
multiprocessing? Have you contributed to any projects working on GIL-
less implementations? Or are you just regurgitating the same bullet
points we've heard time and time again?

For chrissake, if you cannot do ANYTHING but BITCH about a change,
then you've no damn right to consider yourself a programmer. Real
programmers find solutions, not excuses.

> And if so, then thank you all for so many wonderful years of effort and
> participation!

You're welcome. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.