PEP 845: Update discussions-to and post-history links

[cdce8p]

• Change is either:
  • To a Draft PEP
  • To an Accepted or Final PEP, with Steering Council approval
  • To fix an editorial issue (markup, typo, link, header, etc)
• PR title prefixed with PEP number (e.g. PEP 123: Summary of changes)

New thread, created for more exposure:
https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-845-leading-dot-value-patterns-for-match-statement/109405

/CC @tmke8

[read-the-docs-community]

Documentation build overview

📚 pep-previews | 🛠️ Build #35050726 | 📁 Comparing 1d130ea against latest (545c670)

  🔍 Preview build  

4 files changed

± pep-0384/index.html
± pep-0489/index.html
± pep-0652/index.html
± pep-0845/index.html

[tmke8]

I still wonder whether the pre-PEP discussion should also be linked: https://discuss.python.org/t/pattern-matching-on-constants-that-arent-in-a-namespace-especially-sentinels/107916 . Is there a policy on that? I think that thread is still relevant because the main issue with this PEP is not the semantics but the spelling/syntax. And that thread was full of syntax discussion.

[cdce8p]

I still wonder whether the pre-PEP discussion should also be linked: https://discuss.python.org/t/pattern-matching-on-constants-that-arent-in-a-namespace-especially-sentinels/107916 .

I was thinking about this, too. Pushed a new commit.

[StanFromIreland]

I see the new Discourse thread has a slightly more detailed title, which I personally find a little clearer. Maybe consider using it here as well?

[cdce8p]

I wouldn't be opposed to update the title. However, maybe this would be better done in a separate PR? From what I've read in the (new) thread, the abstract could be improved a bit as well.

[tmke8]

Yes, I think the title of the discourse thread is better.

[StanFromIreland]

This PR is quite compact, so adding it here would be fine, but you can also do it separately.

[cdce8p]

Let's just update the links here then and do everything else in a separate PR.