Issue 26954: Add Guido's rejection notice to the "with" FAQ

classification

Title:	Add Guido's rejection notice to the "with" FAQ
Type:		Stage:
Components:	Documentation	Versions:	Python 3.10, Python 3.9

process

Status:	open	Resolution:
Dependencies:		Superseder:
Assigned To:	docs@python	Nosy List:	docs@python, steven.daprano
Priority:	normal	Keywords:

Created on 2016-05-04 16:08 by steven.daprano, last changed 2020-10-26 11:57 by iritkatriel.

Messages (1)
msg264832 - (view)	Author: Steven D'Aprano (steven.daprano) *	Date: 2016-05-04 16:08
The FAQs include a discussion of the rejected Pascal "with" statement (different from the Python `with`). From time to time people propose variants of it, such as using a leading dot to make it unambiguous. Guido has just firmly rejected the latest such proposal. The FAQ should be updated to make it clear that even with a leading dot the proposal is dead, with a link to Guido's pronouncement. https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2016-May/040070.html

msg264832 - (view)

Author: Steven D'Aprano (steven.daprano) * (Python committer)

Date: 2016-05-04 16:08

The FAQs include a discussion of the rejected Pascal "with" statement (different from the Python `with`). From time to time people propose variants of it, such as using a leading dot to make it unambiguous.

Guido has just firmly rejected the latest such proposal. The FAQ should be updated to make it clear that even with a leading dot the proposal is dead, with a link to Guido's pronouncement.

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2016-May/040070.html

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2020-10-26 11:57:04	iritkatriel	set	versions: + Python 3.9, Python 3.10, - Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4, Python 3.5, Python 3.6
2016-05-04 16:08:02	steven.daprano	create