On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 at 22:12, Andrew Barnert via Python-ideas <python-ideas@python.org> wrote: > As I’ve said before, I believe that anything that doesn’t have a builtin type > does not deserve builtin syntax. And I don’t understand why that isn’t a > near-ubiquitous viewpoint. But it’s not just you; at least three people (all > of whom dislike the whole concept of custom affixes) seem at least in > principle open to the idea of adding builtin affixes for types that don’t > exist. Which makes me think it’s almost certainly not that you’re all crazy, > but that I’m missing something important. Can you explain it to me?
In my case, it's me that had missed something - namely the whole of this point. I can imagine having builtin syntax for a stdlib type (like Decimal, Fraction, or regex), but I agree that it gives the stdlib special privileges which I'm uncomfortable with. I definitely agree that built in syntax for 3rd party types is unacceptable. That quite probably contradicts some of my earlier statements - just assume I was wrong previously, I'm not going to bother going back over what I said and correcting my comments :-) I remain of the opinion that the benefits of user-defined literals would be sufficiently marginal that they wouldn't justify the cost, though. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/W3FKSALZCBG2B22H47NRIFFHAWDRNC67/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
