Add Guido's rejection notice to the "with" FAQ

[stevendaprano]

BPO	26954
Nosy	@stevendaprano

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = None
created_at = <Date 2016-05-04.16:08:02.145>
labels = ['3.9', '3.10', 'docs']
title = 'Add Guido\'s rejection notice to the "with" FAQ'
updated_at = <Date 2020-10-26.11:57:04.147>
user = 'https://github.com/stevendaprano'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2020-10-26.11:57:04.147>
actor = 'iritkatriel'
assignee = 'docs@python'
closed = False
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Documentation']
creation = <Date 2016-05-04.16:08:02.145>
creator = 'steven.daprano'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 26954
keywords = []
message_count = 1.0
messages = ['264832']
nosy_count = 2.0
nosy_names = ['steven.daprano', 'docs@python']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = None
stage = None
status = 'open'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue26954'
versions = ['Python 3.9', 'Python 3.10']

[stevendaprano]

The FAQs include a discussion of the rejected Pascal "with" statement (different from the Python with). From time to time people propose variants of it, such as using a leading dot to make it unambiguous.

Guido has just firmly rejected the latest such proposal. The FAQ should be updated to make it clear that even with a leading dot the proposal is dead, with a link to Guido's pronouncement.

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2016-May/040070.html

[gvanrossum]

Thanks!