On Thu, Jan 16, 2020, at 23:07, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Sounds like you should just submit a bug report (and a PR with a fix if
> you feel up to it). Since a relative seek to position p is typically
> just implemented as an absolute seek to position f.tell()+p, this looks
> like an odd
Sounds like you should just submit a bug report (and a PR with a fix if you
feel up to it). Since a relative seek to position p is typically just
implemented as an absolute seek to position f.tell()+p, this looks like an
odd omission, and I can't remember a reason for it. Looking at the code,
the
> What if the colon were made optional, with an eye to perhaps eventually
no longer using it as the preferred style for new code?
> But if a line beginning as a compound statement and ending without a
colon is *never* going to have a valid meaning as something else... what's
the point of the
On 04/12/2019 23:41:19, Andrew Barnert via Python-ideas wrote:
On Dec 4, 2019, at 12:14, Mike Miller wrote:
On 2019-12-04 11:05, David Mertz wrote:
I've often wanted named loops. I know approaches to this have been proposed
many times, and they all have their own warts. E.g. an ad hoc
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020, at 18:15, David Mertz wrote:
> For what it's worth, after 20+ years of using Python, forgetting the
> colon for blocks remains the most common error I make by a fairly wide
> margin. Of course, once I see the error message—even being not all that
> descriptive of the real
