On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Walter Hurry <walterhu...@lavabit.com> wrote: > On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 08:00:06 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >>> On 2013-04-08, Walter Hurry <walterhu...@lavabit.com> wrote: >>>> The fact of Python enforcing it (or all tabs; a poor second choice) >>>> is *a good thing*, easy and natural IMHO. No need for "end if" or "end >>>> loop" or "fi". One wonders whether OP is simply trolling. >>> >>> If he was trolling, he certainly deserves a prize. >> >> I don't think he was trolling. It was a classic-model rant: "I upgraded >> my dependency to a newer version and all my stuff broke". >> Commonly provokes anger, largely because many such upgrades do NOT break >> stuff (eg if I were to switch from gcc 4.5 to gcc 4.7 right now, >> I doubt anything would break, and my code would be able to use the new >> iterator syntax in c++11 - pity 4.7 isn't packaged for Debian Squeeze). >> The OP upgraded across an openly-non-backward-compatible boundary, and >> got angry over one particular aspect of backward compat that wasn't >> there. > > But wouldn't it have been easier simply to do do a quick sed or whatever > rather than to spend hours here arguing?
Probably. I don't profess to understand the OP's brain *that* much! ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
