[Python-Dev] PEP 408 -- Standard library preview package (original) (raw)

Mike Meyer mwm at mired.org
Sat Jan 28 19:46:18 CET 2012

Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:14:36 -0500 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

On Jan 28, 2012, at 09:15 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:

>So I do not support the preview package. I think we're better off >flagging experimental modules in the docs than in their name. For the >specific case of the regex module, the best way to adoption may just >be to include it in the stdlib as regex and keep it there. Any other >solution will just cause too much anxiety. +1 What does the PEP give you above this "simple as possible" solution? "I think we'll just see folks using the unstable APIs and then complaining when we remove them, even though they know upfront that these APIs will go away." That problem would be much worse if some modules were simply marked "experimental" in the doc, rather than put in a separate namespace. You will see people copying recipes found on the internet without knowing that they rely on unstable APIs.

How. About doing them the way we do depreciated modules, and have them spit warnings to stderr? Maybe add a flag and environment variable to disable that.

-- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list