3 ms·
I'll point out that the walrus operator was actually accepted while Guido was still BDFL (and the vitriol surrounding the decision to include it led directly to
by DangitBobby 5y ago
I'll point out that the walrus operator was actually accepted while Guido was still BDFL (and the vitriol surrounding the decision to include it led directly to him stepping down from the position [1]), so even accepting the fact that it's a poor addition to the language, does not provide support for the statement that "design by committee" has lead to poor language design decisions.
1. https://pythonsimplified.com/the-most-controversial-python-walrus-operator/ https://pythonsimplified.com/the-most-controversial-python-w...
- dataflow 5y agoYou'll want to post that as a reply to the parent you originally replied to, since I'm not the one who said anything about design-by-committee.
- DangitBobby 5y agoThey gave no specific criticisms. This thread was born of a request for specific criticisms. When that happens, I try to operate as though the assumptions laid out in the parents hold for the children. I think this makes sense to do, especially when you appeared to step in as a proxy expanding on the parent's opinion. Even if that wasn't your intention, this is a public thread, and the most relevant place to post things as a response to a sentiment in a thread may not be directly to a person who holds that exact sentiment. If you don't take issue with "design by committee" then you need not be concerned. I don't think you think that, and I think no less of you regardless.
- dataflow 5y agoI meant it moreso that the person whom the reply is actually relevant to might not see it otherwise, but whatever, it's fine with me.