On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > As a community, we're risk-adverse. I understand why we should be > conservative in what we add to the language (once added, it cannot > easily be removed if it turns out to be a mistake) but on Python-Ideas > we regularly demand levels of obviousness and "readability" that > existing syntax does not reach. > > (For example, the dot operator for attribute access fails the "syntax > should not look like grit on Tim's monitor" test.)
My understanding of that test is, more or less: "syntax should not be such that grit on Tim's monitor can make it ambiguous". Which would mean that attribute access does pass, since there's no logical meaning for "list sort()" or "random randint" with just a space between them. But otherwise, yes, I absolutely agree. 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/
