Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> writes: > On 2011-08-10, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And if we require {} then truly free indentation should be OK too! > > But it wouldn't be Python any more. > > Would it really not be Python at all?
See the Python interpreter's response to ‘from __future__ import braces’. > I've seen bits of code in preprocessing-based "Python with {}" type > things, and they still look like Python to me, only they favor > explicit over implicit a little more strongly. They introduce unnecessary ambiguity: the indentation-as-structure and braces-as-structure can then disagree. In which case either the Python interpreter must guess the programmer's intent (very un-Pythonic), or it throws an error and the programmer must do busy-work to keep braces and indentation in agreement (also un-Pythonic). The ambiguity is resolved by having exactly one of indentation or braces determining structure: Python uses indentation. In which case, braces are pointless for indicating block structure. -- \ “Without cultural sanction, most or all of our religious | `\ beliefs and rituals would fall into the domain of mental | _o__) disturbance.” —John F. Schumaker | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list