Thanks -- this is the kind of work that helps a PEP get accepted. I am personally in favor of accepting PEP 505, and I hope that your work and the discussion that will undoubtedly follow here will help convince the Steering Council to accept it.
--Guido On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:38 AM Doug Swarin <dswa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I've been following PEP 505 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0505/) > since it was first proposed for Python 3.8. It's been deferred for some > time and I'm interested in seeing it in Python 3.11, but I know there were > also a number of objections which resulted in it being deferred (including > by one of the original authors, Mr. Dower). I did email both Mr. Dower and > Mr. Haase and they graciously gave me their permission to bring it up on > this list for discussion and hopefully final pronouncement one way or the > other. > > I personally believe that the PEP will result in a significant reduction > in boilerplate code, and it is substantially similar to the same operators > now found in a number of other languages, especially C# and JavaScript ( > https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_coalescing_operator and > https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_navigation_operator). > > I believe strong and valid arguments can be made about the use of None > being a fundamental flaw in some types of coding (and that adding > additional support for it to the language will increase the use of None in > this way), but I also believe there are many use cases in programming where > it is by far the simplest way to express various semantics, and the fact > exists that None is already used extensively in large quantities of code, > and further that there is already a great deal of code written to > constantly test against None and break out of a statement without throwing > an error. > > I also understand the argument that especially the maybe-dot (?.) and > maybe-subscript (?[) operators can decrease readability of code and also > believe these are valid arguments against it. While I believe the existence > and use of these operators in other languages definitely helps the case > that these can be used and understood successfully, I think it is entirely > valid to either consider other syntax (though I prefer the chosen syntax of > PEP 505), or even to reduce PEP 505 to having only the coalesce operator > (??) and the maybe-assign operator (??=). > > Separately, I have implemented a pure-Python solution for PEP505 (which is > definitely rather beta) which might help test the waters for a final > implementation in CPython (though the CPython implementation would of > course be much more efficient). It can be found at > https://pypi.org/project/pep505/ > > Thanks, > Doug > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/XZZIV42XGG3EIHRBBCCTTCFPWWSOT7MX/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/BFL7R3HYXAVEZDW4FNVUM7SVPE373ZAX/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
