Cameron Simpson writes: > But we've got "ignore" in play already. Can't we accept that it is > somewhat evocative though clearly not perfect for everyone, and > move on?
No, that is *way* out. We can overrule the objections, recognizing that sometimes compromise is the worst of the four possible actions (this, that, mix, wait). But don't ask me to "accept" what I consider to be an idea that admits a *lot* of improvement.[1] Let time prove me wrong, please. Footnotes: [1] I've said my piece about "with contextlib.ignore()"; this is not a reiteration. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com