"Paul Rubin" <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm opposed to pretty much every proposal of this sort. If you want > to propose adding a feature to the language, add it in a way that the > compiler can know about it and notice when it's not used correctly. > Mere conventions that are not checked by the compiler are just more > stuff for people to remember. That doesn't say they're always useless > but in general they should not be the subject of PEP's. There are more than a dozen "informational PEPs" so far, or two dozens if you count the meta-PEPs as well (http://www.python.org/peps/). This PEP states upfront that it is informational, so I don't see the problem, unless are you suggesting a (meta-)PEP against informational PEPs in general :-) George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
