On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:39:50AM -0700, Brendan Barnwell wrote: > On 2018-07-19 06:38, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >*Its just spelling*. If it is a useful and well-defined feature, we'll > >get used to the spelling soon enough. > > > >That's not to say that spelling is not important *at all*, or that we > >should never prefer words to symbols. But if the only objection we have > >is "this is useful but I don't like the spelling so -1" then that's > >usually a pretty weak argument against the feature. > > But we already have a spelling for the most common case. It is: > > x = a if a is not None else b > > That is the only use case of any of these operators that is actually > common enough for me to care about --- but it's still not common enough > to warrant the creation of a new operator, let alone multiple new operators.
That's a reasonable argument: "there's no need for this operator because...", albeit it is a subjective argument. (There's no objective rule about how common an operation should be before allowing it to be an operator.) What's not a reasonable argument is "I see that there could be a need for this operator, but I don't like the spelling so -1 on the entire proposal", which was my point. (One of my points.) -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
