Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <chris@rebertia.com>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.007
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'operator': 0.04; 'python': 0.08; 'indicates': 0.09; 'negative.': 0.09; 'url:peps': 0.09; 'c++': 0.12; 'things.': 0.13; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.15; 'syntax': 0.15; 'above?': 0.16; 'dummy': 0.16; 'subject:pass': 0.16; 'cheers,': 0.18; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'defined': 0.19; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.21; 'versions': 0.23; 'itself,': 0.23; 'module,': 0.23; 'url:dev': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.23; 'removed.': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.25; 'statement': 0.25; 'function': 0.27; 'received:209.85.220': 0.27; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.29; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.29; 'kinda': 0.30; 'chris': 0.30; 'subject:?': 0.31; 'nov': 0.31; 'pm,': 0.31; 'thu,': 0.32; 'does': 0.32; "isn't": 0.32; 'this.': 0.33; 'there': 0.33; 'character': 0.34; '17,': 0.34; 'see,': 0.34; 'subject:What': 0.34; 'similar': 0.35; 'things': 0.35; 'rather': 0.35; 'url:python': 0.35; 'anything': 0.36; 'fri,': 0.36; 'skip:" 10': 0.36; 'but': 0.37; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'received:209.85': 0.38; 'url:org': 0.38; 'basic': 0.39; 'subject:: ': 0.39; 'change': 0.39; 'received:209': 0.40; 'more': 0.60; 'personal': 0.61; 'your': 0.61; 'john': 0.62; '2011': 0.62; 'special': 0.67; 'sender:addr:chris': 0.84; 'subject:should': 0.84
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rebertia.com; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=lFLhqWr8CWfjhZ8wfj480Mo2MWBZQPq/nqth4VBdAEI=; b=LMvrVFCommLNbU6fQ8e7XOiiCYTQKjv2/5vW69U7sBGoRAZvu1oZYh8kJbJtSC76pR 9I8Eq7iqOsMq0dn7aJuMAMKlaFi6DH3pPm/PVeLr7eCYL1XCUwiTb+QFndGGFkqJ6/QO fqXvZxlyedCRBm0Ml+7pBbYelTJoVVA5QL/sw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: chris@rebertia.com
In-Reply-To: <CAPTjJmr6YQ-vDrqfp6xpwdENVFL5Mhkb=AKLZOSau3RJDX5kJg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <27955957.352.1321582691251.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prap37> <mailman.2818.1321590908.27778.python-list@python.org> <3758934.65.1321592843731.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prms22> <CAPTjJmr6YQ-vDrqfp6xpwdENVFL5Mhkb=AKLZOSau3RJDX5kJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:49:47 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: zVAicGUjNbDr4ZaqA0SaUlPgwbg
Subject: Re: What exactly is "pass"? What should it be?
From: Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com>
To: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: python-list@python.org
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://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: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.2824.1321595391.27778.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 25
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1321595391 news.xs4all.nl 6957 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:46327
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:15870

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 4:07 PM, John Ladasky <ladasky@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> One of my questions was: would there be any merit to having the Python "pass" token itself defined exactly as _pass() is defined above?
>
> No, there wouldn't. The Python 'pass' statement is a special statement
> that indicates a lack of anything to execute; a dummy function call
> isn't this. What I would kinda like to see, though, is function
> versions of many things. Your basic operators exist in the 'operator'
> module, but the syntax is rather clunky; for comparison, Pike has
> beautifully simple (if a little cryptic) syntax: back-tick followed by
> the operator itself, very similar to the way C++ does operator
> overloading.
>
> In Python 2, back-tick has a special meaning. In Python 3, that
> meaning is removed. Is the character now available for this
> "function-version" syntax?

Negative. I know this from personal experience.

Things that will Not Change in Python 3000
(http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3099/ ):
"No more backticks."

Cheers,
Chris R.