On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 12:30:47AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Greg Ewing writes: > > > With my "no new syntax" suggestion there would be no question here -- > > the only way to write it would be > > > > height = 5 * ft + 4.5 * in > > I'm very sympathetic to the "no new syntax" suggestion, but suppose I > wanted to know how many cm there are in an in: > > cm_per_in = 1 * in / 1 * cm
inch.definition() inch.convert(cm) > Of course that's a silly mistake, but the (sole, IMO) advantage of the > original proposal is that you can't make that silly mistake. Don't worry, I'm sure it will allow its own distinct silly mistakes :-) -- Steve _______________________________________________ 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/PWL5IBNZXFPB77DKQIWULEMZFDYMGMJ3/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
