Please don't hide your new thread as a reply to an existing, unrelated
message. Start a new message if your message isn't actually a reply.
Michael Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can anyone find a flaw with this change in syntax?
>
> Instead of dividing a compound statement with a colon, why not
> divide it on a newline? For example, the colon could be dropped from
> this statement:
> if self.hungry:
> self.eat()
> to
> if self.hungry
> self.eat()
But it can't be dropped from this statement:
if self.hungry: self.eat()
> The colon that divides the statement therefore seems redundant. The
> colon could continue to be used for single-line statements:
> if self.hungry: self.eat()
Why have two different syntaxes for the same statement?
> I think the colon could be omitted from every type of compound
> statement: 'if', 'for', 'def', 'class', whatever. Am I missing
> anything?
A use case. What problem is being solved by introducing this
inconsistency?
--
\ "The shortest distance between two points is under |
`\ construction." -- Noelie Alito |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
