[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] > It is perfectly ok to define coding policy within an organisation, for > a project that have more than one developer and things like that. But > if the language allows more than one way to do it, people would try if > that is what they want and they can. > > I would say that if "only one way to do it" is the intend, make it into > the language and any other way is simply error. Say if ternary operator > is not the "preferred way", don't have it in the language. If someone > find a way to work around it, change that part of the language to break > their code. > This would have the unfortunate side effect of only allowing changes to Python that allowed users to do things which are currently impossible.
Since Python is Turing-complete, this would effectively inhibit all further changes to the language. Would you, say, remove "for" loops because they could be written as "while" loops. Don't forget the word "obvious" that appears in that catchphrase ... regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com PyCon TX 2006 www.python.org/pycon/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
