(original) (raw)

On 31 Oct 2013 18:52, "Eric Snow" <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> wrote:
\>
\> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
\> > There's also the option of implementing the constraint directly in the
\> > finder, which \*does\* have the necessary info (with the change to pass the
\> > previous spec to find\_spec).
\>
\> Yeah, I thought of that. �I just prefer the more explicit
\> supports\_reload(). �That said...
\>
\> >
\> > I still think it makes more sense to leave this out for the moment - it's
\> > not at all clear we need the extra method, and adding it later would be a
\> > straightforward protocol update.
\>
\> ...I agree that makes the most sense for now. :)
\>
\> BTW, thanks for pushing these issues. �I think the API has gotten
\> pretty solid. �I just need to make sure the PEP covers the cases and
\> conclusions we're discussing.

Thanks are also due to PJE for making me realise we were handwaving too much when it came to the expected reload semantics :)

Cheers,
Nick.

>
\> -eric