This isn’t itself an April Fools, but some of the PEPs I’m about to reference will be.
How familiar are you with previous Python Enhancement Proposals? In each block of three, two are actual PEPs and one is not. Can you recognize, without clicking through to check the actual documents, which one is fake?
- PEP 212 - Binary Floating Point Literals
- PEP 313 - Adding Roman Numeral Literals to Python
- PEP 414 - Explicit Unicode Literal for Python 3.3
- PEP 441 - Improving Python ZIP Application Support
- PEP 442 - Biannual Release Cadence
- PEP 443 - Single-dispatch generic functions
- PEP 396 - Module Version Numbers
- PEP 516 - Replacing Versioning with Rolling Releases
- PEP 2026 - Calendar versioning for Python
- PEP 252 - Making Types Look More Like Classes
- PEP 253 - Improving Class Typography
- PEP 254 - Making Classes Look More Like Types
- PEP 379 - Adding an Assignment Expression
- PEP 572 - Assignment Expressions
- PEP 573 - Assignment Without an Expression
- PEP 203 - Augmented Assignments
- PEP 577 - Augmented Assignment Expressions
- PEP 3110 - Augmenting Assignment in Python 3000
- PEP 3003 - Python Language Moratorium
- PEP 3103 - A Switch/Case Statement
- PEP 3333 - Encrypting PYC Files
- PEP 294 - Enforced Type Hint Annotations
- PEP 483 - The Theory of Type Hints
- PEP 3117 - Postfix type declarations
How many did you recognize? (Even better: How many great April 1sts from years gone by were you unaware of, but now enjoy the timeless beauty of?)
