Le 10/04/14 22:15, njsmith a écrit :
> I know it can be frustrating to feel like you're being ignored, and I'm
> trying to be constructive, but if you're going to reply to my post
> saying "please engage with the specific points instead of just repeating
> assertions over and over" by repeating vague assertions and ignoring
> specific points then I've kind of run out of responses. A PEP which has,
> in fact, convinced the BDFL and (apparently) the rest of the Python core
> team is, by definition, convincing. Maybe we were all *wrong* to be
> convinced, it's always possible. But asserting that it isn't convincing
> and saying nothing else just makes it sound like you think we're all
> idiots. (To be clear, there's nothing wrong with thinking we're all
> idiots. That could be true to. But as a practical matter it's not going
> to produce any of the changes in behaviour that you're hoping for.)

That is, to put it mildly, a fallacy. It's quite obvious that Guido 
trusted the PEP authors to produce a fair assessment of domain-specific 
technical issues and did not scrutinise each claim.