[Python-ideas] PEP 505: None-aware operators

[Steve Dower]

On 23Jul2018 1530, David Mertz wrote:
> Of course I don't mean that if implemented the semantics 
> would be ambiguous... rather, the proper "swallowing" of different kinds 
> of exceptions is not intuitively obvious, not even to you, Steve.  And 
> if some decision was reached and documented, it would remain unclear to 
> new (or even experienced) users of the feature.

As written in the PEP, no exceptions are ever swallowed. The translation 
into existing syntax is very clearly and unambiguously shown, and there 
is no exception handling at all. All the exception handling discussion 
in the PEP is under the heading of "rejected ideas".

This email discussion includes some hypotheticals, since that's the 
point - I want thoughts and counter-proposals for semantics and 
discussion. I am 100% committed to an unambiguous PEP, and I believe the 
current proposal is most defensible. However, I don't want to have a 
"discussion" where I simply assume that I'm right, everyone else is 
wrong, and I refuse to discuss or consider alternatives.

So sorry for letting you all think that everything I write is actually 
the PEP. I had assumed that because my emails are not the PEP that 
people would realise that they are not the PEP. I'm going to duck out of 
the discussions here now, since they are not as productive as I'd hoped, 
and once we have a BDFL-replacement I'll reawaken it and see what is 
required at that point.

Cheers,
Steve