On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
<d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no> wrote:
> On 05/14/2012 01:34 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>
>> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 13.05.2012 21:37:
>>>
>>> Anyway, thanks for the heads up, this seems to need a bit more work.
>>> Input
>>> from somebody more familiar with this corner of the CPython API very
>>> welcome.
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't you consider python-dev an appropriate place to discuss this?
>
>
> Propose something for a PEP that's primarily useful to Cython without even
> understanding the full implications myself first?
>
> I'd rather try to not annoy people; I figured the time I have the CPython
> patches ready and tested is the time I ping python-dev...

If you want to eventually propose a PEP, you really really really
should be talking to them before. Otherwise you'll get everything
worked out just the way you want and they'll be like "what is this?
re-do it all totally differently". And they might be wrong, but then
you have to reconstruct for them the whole debate and reasoning
process and implicit assumptions that you're making and not realizing
you need to articulate, so easier to just get all the interested
people at the table to begin with. And they might be right, in which
case you just wasted however much time digging yourself into a hole
and reverse-engineering bits of CPython.

Don't propose it as a PEP, just say "hey, we have this problem and
these constraints, and we're thinking we could solve them by something
like this; but of course that has these limitations, so I dunno. What
do you think?" And expect to spend some time figuring out what your
requirements actually are (even if you think you know already, see
above about implicit assumptions).

-- Nathaniel
_______________________________________________
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel

Reply via email to