Chris Angelico wrote: > It may be true, but it isn't better IMO - especially not for the > abstract. It's unnecessarily pedantic. The current wording isn't > ambiguous, because infinite recursion makes no sense.
Thank you for this. Please take a look and compare https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0505/#abstract https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0572/#abstract I'd like to get an abstract for PEP 572 that is as concise and clear as that for PEP 505. My previous comment focused just on 'the sharp edge that cut me'. But the more I look at PEP 572, the more I see sharp edges (in the expression of the ideas in the PEP). Having said that, I hope now to return to lurking, until we have cover for the BDFL vacation. -- Jonathan _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
