[Python-3000] Question about PEP 3001 and fixing API flaws (original) (raw)

Steven Bethard steven.bethard at gmail.com
Thu Mar 22 05:55:28 CET 2007

On 3/21/07, BJörn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com> wrote:

On 3/21/07, Steven Bethard <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/14/07, BJörn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com> wrote: > > So I wonder what is the policy for fixing mistakes in the API design? > > In general, I think if you can warn about it in 2.6 or you can add to > 2to3 so that this gets automatically fixed, then it's okay to fix the > API.

Is that the general consensus? I think I remember having read Raymond Hettinger complain about to many warnings in 2.6.

Well, I can't speak for Raymond, but I think much of that is supposed to be addressed by introducing the -Wpy3k flag which will be off by default, and which will set a C-level bit flag so that any warnings that need to go in speed-critical locations can have as little impact as possible. Or at least that was the plan as I understood it.

OK. So every API repair is a two step process? Fix the API in py3k and then add a warning to 2.6 and update the manual.

Yep. You probably don't need a PEP for every one, but maybe we should collect all (or at least as many as possible of) the minor changes in a PEP somewhere just for reference...

STeVe

I'm not in-sane. Indeed, I am so far out of sane that you appear a tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity. --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list