Author steven.daprano
Recipients FFY00, eric.araujo, gregory.p.smith, mark.dickinson, p-ganssle, pablogsal, steven.daprano, theacodes, tlalexander, veky
Date 2021-07-14.04:26:40
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <20210714042434.GM13804@ando.pearwood.info>
In-reply-to <1626141510.8.0.243374835753.issue44603@roundup.psfhosted.org>
Content
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 01:58:30AM +0000, Taylor Alexander wrote:

> I would push back against the idea that this is about laziness. It 
> sounds like this is about reducing user confusion.

Users aren't *confused* by the instructions, which are clear and simple: 
call the object using parentheses. Nobody says that they don't 
understand what it means to "use exit() to exit".

They are *annoyed* that they have to type the parentheses. This is not 
confusion, and it is disengenious to claim that people are "confused".

Especially when people have said that they understand the technical 
reasons for why exit behaves as it does, and that makes them "more 
frustrated". So they understand the reasoning why having repr(exit) kill 
the interpreter is a bad idea, and rather than satisfying them, they get 
even more annoyed.
History
Date User Action Args
2021-07-14 04:26:41steven.dapranosetrecipients: + steven.daprano, gregory.p.smith, mark.dickinson, eric.araujo, veky, p-ganssle, pablogsal, FFY00, theacodes, tlalexander
2021-07-14 04:26:41steven.dapranolinkissue44603 messages
2021-07-14 04:26:40steven.dapranocreate