Skip to content

PEP 622: More details on 'marker prefix for lookups' rejected idea - #1564

Closed
ncoghlan wants to merge 1 commit into
python:masterfrom
ncoghlan:pep-622-propose-rewording-of-some-rejected-ideas
Closed

ncoghlan wants to merge 1 commit into
python:masterfrom
ncoghlan:pep-622-propose-rewording-of-some-rejected-ideas

Conversation

@ncoghlan

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The "Rejected Ideas" section didn't clearly cover the perceived
benefits of using a marker prefix on value lookup match patterns.

This expands on that section, while still making it clear that
the listed PEP authors don't agree that the proposal would actually
deliver the benefits that its proponents believe it would provide.

The "Rejected Ideas" section didn't clearly cover the perceived
benefits of using a marker prefix on value lookup match patterns.

This expands on that section, while still making it clear that
the listed PEP authors don't agree that the proposal would actually
deliver the benefits that its proponents believe it would provide.
@gvanrossum

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I'm sorry, I don't want the PEP to be a soapbox for this misguided idea. I'll adopt a few of the clarifications you are proposing at the beginning of the PR, but I don't feel your idea deserves this much airtime in the PEP.

@gvanrossum gvanrossum closed this Aug 15, 2020
mnm678 pushed a commit to mnm678/peps that referenced this pull request Oct 22, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants