On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 4:07 PM, John Ladasky <lada...@my-deja.com> wrote: > One of my questions was: would there be any merit to having the Python "pass" > token itself defined exactly as _pass() is defined above?
No, there wouldn't. The Python 'pass' statement is a special statement that indicates a lack of anything to execute; a dummy function call isn't this. What I would kinda like to see, though, is function versions of many things. Your basic operators exist in the 'operator' module, but the syntax is rather clunky; for comparison, Pike has beautifully simple (if a little cryptic) syntax: back-tick followed by the operator itself, very similar to the way C++ does operator overloading. In Python 2, back-tick has a special meaning. In Python 3, that meaning is removed. Is the character now available for this "function-version" syntax? ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
