Please formally reject PEP-536

[ericvsmith]

This PEP suggested moving f-strings to the python grammar. It's basically what was implemented by PEP 701 – "Syntactic formalization of f-strings". As such, 536 is obsolete.

I was going to mark 536 as rejected, but I think there should be formal SC action to reject it, not some random committer rejecting it.

I'll do the actual work of updating the PEP, unless you want to.

Thanks.

[merwok]

Alternatively, the author @flying-sheep could withdraw it.

[flying-sheep]

How do I do that?

[merwok]

With a PR to change the status (and maybe a post on python-dev to let people know and have a link for the resolution header)

Not much info in the meta-PEP: https://peps.python.org/pep-0001/#pep-review-resolution

[flying-sheep]

I can just link here I guess. I agree with @ericvsmith that 701 does exactly what I intended to change with 536 (only a few years later), so I wish to widthdraw PEP 536.

[merwok]

I do believe it should be a link to a mailing list post (nowadays discuss).

[flying-sheep]

Ugh, yeah it does need to be that. CI complains otherwise.

[hugovk]

PEP 536 has been withdrawn, this issue can be closed:

• PEP 536: Mark as Withdrawn peps#3510
• https://peps.python.org/pep-0536/

Thanks all.