This syntax seems ugly to me, clunky, and as you said probably breaks existing code
This, to me, is less clear than current methods of generating an 'inf' which is the whole reason I proposed it Thanks, ---- *Cade Brown* Research Assistant @ ICL (Innovative Computing Laboratory) Personal Email: [email protected] ICL/College Email: [email protected] On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 9:38 AM Ricky Teachey <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 3:09 AM Random832 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020, at 12:45, Cade Brown wrote: >> > I am positing that Python should contain a constant (similar to True, >> > False, None), called Infinity. >> >> What if we created a new syntax [and used it for the repr] that is not >> currently a valid identifier? >> >> something like "1.INF" >> > > This is out of the box and might be considered insane, but what about: > > >>> INF# > INF# > >>> INF # this is a comment as usual > NameError: INF > > But I suppose this would be considered a breaking change, since the text > "INF#" probably exists in code somewhere. > > --- > Ricky. > > "I've never met a Kentucky man who wasn't either thinking about going home > or actually going home." - Happy Chandler > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/VAJC2IEAQ4CHVE24JLZOYPYGIRHSOWGG/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/NIGHQJZ7QXXBEXFRKBWDP6R235CDDBED/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
