R. David Murray added the comment: That presumably means adding special None support to all the places None can appear in a message, where now the code treats None like it does every other object. I'm not sure the added complexity is worth it, especially since NoneType would still creep in anywhere we'd forgotten to "fix". I'm not voting -1, but I'm dubious.
Maybe we should just make NoneType's name be 'None' :) ---------- nosy: +r.david.murray _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue28702> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
