Call for signatories for J2

[Robert Brewer]

The J2 proposal is as complete as it will ever be.

http://www.aminus.org/rbre/python/pydec.html

The patch is nearly complete; only the __future__ declaration and some
document tweaks remain. It should be updated on SourceForge today or
tomorrow.

This is a call for all who wish to sign the proposal, either for,
against, or abstaining. Please sign by either posting on
comp.lang.python (replying to this is fine), or sending email to
fu******@amor.org (for some of you reading this, here's a link:
mailto:fu******@amor.org). Please include your full name. If you reject
the proposal, please also include a _short_ description of why you are
rejecting it. You will not receive a reply regarding the rejection or
description; it will be included for Guido's information purposes only.

Please read the proposal carefully before signing. In particular,
carefully read the statement (for, against, or abstaining) to which you
are signing your name; each is explicit and means exactly what it says.

Thanks again to those who have contributed in all forms. Hopefully, we
can put this decorator issue to rest soon and move on.
Robert Brewer
MIS
Amor Ministries
fu******@amor.org

P.S. I'll be out of town from Friday morning to Sunday evening (U.S.
Pacific Time), so get your name in early. Given sufficient volume, I'll
promote this to Guido just before I leave; otherwise, I'll wait 'til
Sunday night to finish compiling names.

[Greg Ewing]

Michael Sparks wrote:

I think I'd agree. However for many people outside of python-dev and those
who only dip into c.l.p, the @pie came as a big shock.

It came as a shock to people *in* python-dev, too. It just
appeared one day as a fait accompli, without any opportunity
for discussion.

--
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept,
University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~greg

[Anthony Baxter]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:34:33 +1200, Greg Ewing
<gr**@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:

It came as a shock to people *in* python-dev, too. It just
appeared one day as a fait accompli, without any opportunity
for discussion.

*shrug* I posted a couple of weeks before from Guido saying "here's
another syntax that Guido is leaning towards", and asking for a
volunteer to write a patch. Patch was done, there was a bit of
back-and-forth in the patch tracker on SF, then it came down to a
Guido decision.

I don't know what additional discussion on python-dev would have
accomplished. Almost no-one spoke up about the @syntax when I posted
the first note.

[Alex Martelli]

Paul Rubin <http://ph****@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:

al*****@yahoo.com (Alex Martelli) writes:

Type declarations make me cringe, but if I *had* to have them then 'b as
int' is the best syntax I could imagine for them offhand.

b:int worked ok in Pascal.

And "b as integer" works quite reasonably in Visual Basic -- I'm not a
VB fan, by any means, but that particular tidbit of VB syntax sugar is
(IMHO) quite good.

A precedent for a dual use of AS, quite close to what we'd have here, is
in SQL. "SELECT foo AS bar" is a local renaming, just like Python's
"import foo as bar"; "CAST(foo AS integer)" is type coercion. Note that
both SQL uses are good parallel for some of the 'overloads' of 'AS' in
English;-).

All in all, the argument that declarator syntax 'might' end up doing
double use for typing purposes is hardly a strong deterrent to the use
of keyword 'as' in declarator syntax.
Alex

[Peter Otten]

For J2

Peter Otten

Though I don't like "using".

[Leif K-Brooks]

Robert Brewer wrote:

This is a call for all who wish to sign the proposal, either for,
against, or abstaining.

For.

Leif K-Brooks.

[Richie Hindle]

[Michael]

Patch against current CVS including __future__ statements/declarations
has now been created, tested and uploaded to SourceForge. All tests
pass.
Nice one - well done for all your work on this.
British Broadcasting Corporation, Research and Development

Is my license fee paying for this? If so, great! 8-) Makes for a much
better investment than Fame Academy.

--
Richie Hindle
ri****@entrian.com

[Nick Jacobson]

I'm not nuts about "using", but it's far better than "@" (as would be
lots of other keywords).

I vote FOR.

--Nick Jacobson

[Michael Sparks]

Richie Hindle wrote:

[Michael]

Patch against current CVS including __future__
statements/declarations has now been created, tested and uploaded to
SourceForge. All tests pass.

Nice one - well done for all your work on this.

You're very welcome. I'd encourage anyone who's interested in python's
advancement to do the same, to be honest. The codebase is one of the
cleanest I've encountered and fairly easy to get started with, and it's
been a pleasure to work on. This experience will certainly encourage me
to participate more in future. (Probably on my own time though!)

British Broadcasting Corporation, Research and Development

Is my license fee paying for this? If so, great! 8-) Makes for a
much better investment than Fame Academy.

Yep. (Well, as well as my own time at the weekend/evenings, but that's
common for open source :)

We have a (small) allocation in our time for "bright ideas" regarding
things that'll help the BBC in ways outside normal projects, and help
further tools etc we use. :-) I think I've probably used mine up for a
while now, but I think it's been worthwhile.

We use Python (amongst many other languages) in R&D for prototyping
ideas and I'm aware of various other parts of the BBC using python as
well, so by helping the python community we help ourselves and everyone
wins :) (Even if the patch is rejected it'll help resolve an argument!)

I couldn't *possibly* begin to comment on Fame Academy though, I might
say something I shouldn't ;-)

Best Regards,
Michael.
--
Mi************@rd.bbc.co.uk
British Broadcasting Corporation, Research and Development
Kingswood Warren, Surrey KT20 6NP

This message (and any attachments) may contain personal views
which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.

[Nick Efford]

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:42:15 -0700, Robert Brewer wrote:

This is a call for all who wish to sign the proposal, either for,
against, or abstaining.

FOR. I could live with @ but I'm warming to J2, and you've
done some great work in presenting cogent arguments.

I'm with Alex M. in favouring 'as' over 'using'.
Nick Efford

[Richie Hindle]

[Michael]

I'd encourage anyone who's interested in python's
advancement to do the same, to be honest. The codebase is one of the
cleanest I've encountered and fairly easy to get started with, and it's
been a pleasure to work on.
Seconded. I've been there and done that (implemented the Set Next Statement
command for Python debuggers), and was pleasantly surprised at how clean and
comprehensible the code was - even in performance-sensitive areas like
ceval.c.
We have a (small) allocation in our time for "bright ideas" regarding
things that'll help the BBC in ways outside normal projects, and help
further tools etc we use.

A good policy. Nice to see that the Beeb's suits can think outside the box
(no pun intended 8-)

--
Richie Hindle
ri****@entrian.com

[A.M. Kuchling]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:42:34 +1000,
Anthony Baxter <an***********@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't know what additional discussion on python-dev would have
accomplished. Almost no-one spoke up about the @syntax when I posted
the first note.

A similar thing happened with the various cataloging efforts. A number of
individuals wrote prototypes and asked for comments from the community,
never getting any. Finally Richard Jones wrote PyPI, put it on python.org,
and contributed the 'register' Distutils subcommand to the standard library;
there was little outside input on all of this.

Of course, the difference is that PyPI hasn't been controversial. But I
think it does demonstrate that Python development is steered mostly by
individuals, not by the vague wishes of the community.

--amk

[Thomas Heller]

"Robert Brewer" <fu******@amor.org> writes:

The J2 proposal is as complete as it will ever be.

http://www.aminus.org/rbre/python/pydec.html

Against. Thomas Heller

why: pie syntax reads better.

[Christopher T King]

I give a vote FOR this proposal. Good job putting this all together.

- Chris King

[Anthony Baxter]

Note that Robert has sent the completed proposal to python-dev, and in
fine Python tradition, buggered off for the weekend. So I'm not
entirely sure it's worthwhile posting more for/against messages now.

[Aahz]

In article <1g****************************@yahoo.com>,
Alex Martelli <al*****@yahoo.com> wrote:

Robert Brewer <fu******@amor.org> wrote:

This is a call for all who wish to sign the proposal, either for,
against, or abstaining. Please sign by either posting on
comp.lang.python (replying to this is fine), or sending email to

For.

I wish we'd use a better keyword than 'using' which would have a
bazillion other possible and useful future interpretations. Of the
possible keywords mentioned on the site, several (by, per, through, via)
appear better to me, and I'd particularly love the three-letter ones as
they'd align well with 'def' -- my own preference would be 'per'.

-1 on ``per``
--
Aahz (aa**@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a
koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You
discover truth everytime you use it." --*****@lion.austin.ibm.com

[Aahz]

All right, with the caveat that I'd prefer C1, I'm voting FOR.
--
Aahz (aa**@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a
koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You
discover truth everytime you use it." --*****@lion.austin.ibm.com

[Scott David Daniels]

Peter Otten wrote:

For J2

Peter Otten

Though I don't like "using".

I think it would be great fun to add this to the document index under
"J2" as well as the keyword finally decied upon (which begins to look
like "using". We all know in great detail what a "J2" is, but in five
years it will be great folklore.

-Scott David Daniels
Sc***********@Acm.Org