On Jul 26, 11:22 pm, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Russ P. wrote: > > On Jul 26, 2:25 pm, Terry Reedy > >> There is a lot of code you have not seen. Really. In informal code I > >> use 's' and 'o' for 'self' and 'other'. I don't usually post such > >> because it is not considered polite. So you have seen a biased sample > >> of the universe. > > > You take the name down to a single letter. As I suggested in an > > earlier post on this thread, why not take it down to zero letters? > > Because 1 letter is legal now, while no letters (already proposed and > rejected) is a major change and breakage of current simplicity and > consistency for zero functional benefit.
Sorry, but I fail to see how it is a "major change." It only applies to the first argument of a class member function, and the parser only needs to look for an empty argument or a period. Furthermore, it would break no working code. It may indeed have been "proposed and rejected," but it would be a nice way to clean up code in many areas, and as long as it cannot break any working code, I think it should be reconsidered. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
