it could be an incremental change by being optional. i don't see any cases where leaving out the ending ] or } would present any meaning different than my suggestion. even leaving out the , at the end of a line presents no different meaning. it's either an error (no meaning at all) or it can be understood.
i could argue that f-strings should have been done in 4.0.
modes = { 'r': 4 'w': 2 'x': 1 names = [ 'foo' 'bar'there is no ambiguity. what else can it mean? if we choose to let it have the one and only meaning it could have, how would it still not be python? of course it is a "major" change, so it cannot be part of python 3.x.
i could argue that f-strings should have been done in 4.0.
Tradition is peer pressure from dead people
What do you call someone who speaks three languages? Trilingual. Two languages? Bilingual. One language? American.
What do you call someone who speaks three languages? Trilingual. Two languages? Bilingual. One language? American.