"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The make statement was mostly syntactic sugar for::
>
>class :
>__metaclass__ =
>
>
> So was technically unnecessary from the beginning. ;) Here's the one
> post where he presented a few reasons
Tim Roberts wrote:
> Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Steven Bethard wrote:
>>> I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. ...
>> Guido has pronounced on this PEP:
>>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-April/000936.html
>> Consider it dead. =)
>
>
Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Steven Bethard wrote:
>> I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. ...
>
>Guido has pronounced on this PEP:
>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-April/000936.html
>Consider it dead. =)
I tried to follow the thread bac
Steven Bethard wrote:
> Guido has pronounced on this PEP:
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-April/000936.h
> tml
> Consider it dead. =)
This is the most frustrating pronouncement ever.
--
--OKB (not okblacke)
Brendan Barnwell
"Do not follow where the path may
Steven Bethard wrote:
> Guido has pronounced on this PEP:
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-April/000936.html
> Consider it dead. =)
Well, Guido is known for having changed his mind before (the ternary
operator,
lambda functions, try..except..finally, etc) so this is not nece
Steven Bethard wrote:
(snip)
> Guido has pronounced on this PEP:
>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-April/000936.html
> Consider it dead. =)
:(
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@'
Steven Bethard wrote:
> I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. The
> patch is available at:
> http://bugs.python.org/1472459
> and I've pasted the full text below.
>
> I've tried to be more explicit about the goals -- the make statement
> is mostly syntactic sugar for::
I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. The
patch is available at:
http://bugs.python.org/1472459
and I've pasted the full text below.
I've tried to be more explicit about the goals -- the make statement
is mostly syntactic sugar for::
class :
__metaclass__
