[Python-Dev] Breaking undocumented API (original) (raw)

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Wed Nov 17 15:46:01 CET 2010

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:25 AM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:

We're also discussing codifying the naming conventions (or using all) within the standard library, so it isn't just about deprecations (which is why I think PEP 8 rather than PEP 5). This is so that in the future if a name looks public users can have more confidence that it actually is...

I deliberately glossed over that, since my stance on the naming conventions is "don't change them" (i.e. PEP 8 already says that a leading underscore is an internal use indicator, and I think that's how we should guide the clarification of our deprecation policy - just carving out an exception for imported modules).

My original question related to dealing with the grey area in the deprecation policy (i.e. wanting to remove an API that was undocumented, but had a public name) and I'm happy that the existing style guide does answer my question (even though the implications aren't necessarily obvious).

Cheers, Nick.

-- Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list