No reason.. I dont really care, but I dont like """ much either. I
definitely dislike the functionality(""") != functionality(''') thing.
>> In one word: EVIL. It would probably require semi-massive change to
>> the compiler. And the restriction that this construct can only be
>> used outside function defs is a first for Python (All of 'import',
>> 'class' and 'def' can be used anywhere, conditional, inside methods,
>> you name it.)
Well, fine.. Id be happy with it as a convention... I just wanted to
avoid the 'strip leading whitespace' while maintaining indentation..
thus a zero level indentation.
>> You are changing the semantics of names in an ad-hoc fashion here.
>> Why should this be done for strings only? I'd be much happier with a
>> proposal for a different string quote ONLY.
Ok.. then only consider that part.
>> > The basic goal is to keep ugly strings out of the code...
>>
>> You could do that with triple quotes by a programming convention.
Right... thats fine, if its encouraged.
>> Actually, there will be a way to do this in 1.0.2 using default
>> parameters, more or less:
>>
>> i = 5
>> def f(i=i):
>> print i
>> i = 6
Ah.. this is fine.. With this and string assignment far away from
code I'm pleased.
>> And if you're looking for a language that makes it impossible for
>> users to pervert the environment in which modules run... Try Ada.
I'd pick Modula-3.. and I do.
-- John Redford (AKA GArrow) | 3,600 hours of tape. jredford@lehman.com | 5 cans of Scotchguard.