Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!nzpost1.xs4all.net!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <lac@openend.se>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.001
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'heavily': 0.04; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'guido': 0.05; 'passionate': 0.05; 'indicated': 0.07; 'indication': 0.09; 'received:openend.se': 0.09; 'received:theraft.openend.se': 0.09; 'syntax': 0.13; 'appropriate': 0.14; 'conditional': 0.16; 'expression.': 0.16; 'from:addr:lac': 0.16; 'from:addr:openend.se': 0.16; 'from:name:laura creighton': 0.16; 'general.': 0.16; 'mess,': 0.16; 'message-id:@fido.openend.se': 0.16; 'poll': 0.16; 'prefered': 0.16; 'received:fido': 0.16; 'received:fido.openend.se': 0.16; "wouldn't": 0.16; 'laura': 0.18; '2015': 0.20; 'preferred': 0.20; 'proposed': 0.20; 'sep': 0.22; 'voting': 0.22; 'bit': 0.23; 'thus': 0.24; 'discussion': 0.24; 'sort': 0.25; '+0200,': 0.27; 'received:se': 0.29; 'largest': 0.31; 'another': 0.32; 'third': 0.33; 'tue,': 0.34; 'that,': 0.34; 'could': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'method': 0.37; 'say': 0.37; 'support,': 0.37; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.37; 'wanted': 0.37; "didn't": 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'still': 0.40; 'header :Message-Id:1': 0.61; 'skip:n 10': 0.62; 'more': 0.63; 'between': 0.65; 'wanting': 0.66; 'header:In-reply-to:1': 0.84; 'pardon': 0.84; 'wanted,': 0.84; 'whatsoever.': 0.84; 'colour': 0.91
To: python-list@python.org
From: Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se>
Subject: Re: Python handles globals badly.
In-reply-to: <55EEA355.3020904@rece.vub.ac.be>
References: <c3363$547e74fe$5419aafe$24179@news.ziggo.nl> <4602a32c-5109-47dd-95bb-b9723738f07f@googlegroups.com> <55E8E09A.3080309@gmail.com> <msapn9$5aa$1@ger.gmane.org> <55EEA355.3020904@rece.vub.ac.be>
Comments: In-reply-to Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> message dated "Tue, 08 Sep 2015 10:59:01 +0200."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <32184.1441706854.1@fido>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 12:07:34 +0200
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.9 (theraft.openend.se [82.96.5.2]); Tue, 08 Sep 2015 12:07:37 +0200 (CEST)
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.210.1441706865.8327.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 37
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1441706865 news.xs4all.nl 23815 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:41788
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:96112

In a message of Tue, 08 Sep 2015 10:59:01 +0200, Antoon Pardon writes:
>Were those polls, like the poll he once did for the condtional expression?
>There the poll indicated no specific proposal had a majority, so for each
>specific proposal one could say it didn't have popular support, but the
>majority still prefered to have a conditional expression. But at that
>time Guido used that poll as an indication there was not enough support.
>
>So colour me a bit sceptical when Guido comes with such a poll.

That's not how I remember it:

There were people who wanted, a conditional expression, 'preferably
<this syntax>, but if I cannot have that, any of the other syntaxes'.
These were the people who were very passionate about wantinhg a
conditional expression.

There were other people who wanted a conditional expression, _but only
with my preferred syntax_.  Given a choice between another syntax and
not having it, they would prefer to not have one.  A good number of
these people were more in the 'I wouldn't mind ...' than passionate
wanters of a conditional expression.

I was in the third group.  Passionately not wanting any
conditional expression whatsoever.

Group 2 was the largest group.

Thus while 1 plus 2 outnumbered 3, for each proposed syntax 3 plus
'the members of group 2 who didn't want this syntax' outnumbered 1 plus 'the
members of group 2 who did'.

Thus a mess, heavily complicated by a very interesting discussion about
what sort of voting method would be appropriate to make such a choice,
and non-winner-take-all systems in general.

Laura