On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 6:09 PM, אלעזר <elaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I meant something like making it a "__bind__" (just a strawman suggestion) > and do the same lookup as foo() does, and using a (wrong) > functional-programming-inspired syntax > > foo 5 () > > Such a syntax will have the side benefit of allowing calling print in a > similar way to Python2, which people seem to love. > > print "hello" () >
Python has a rule that syntax shouldn't look like grit on Tim's screen. In this case, it looks like the *absence of* grit, which is even worse :) You're giving meaning to the abuttal of two tokens, the first of which must be callable but the second can be anything. And it creates the scary situation of giving valid-but-useless meaning to something all too common in Py2 code: print "hello" This would now create a function that, if called, would print "hello", but then abandons it without a second thought. So it'd work in 2.7, fail with an opaque error in 3.3, fail with a more informative error in 3.5, and silently do nothing in 3.7. No thank you! :) ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
