On 1/2/07, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Brett, Thanks for writing this up.
Welcome! Sometimes I worry about my penchant for Python masochism. Here are my thoughts on this (after 3 weeks away, I'm still catching up):
The link to PEP 4 is broken.
Thanks, fixed. "nis" -- NIS is still widely used by many people; probably premature to
remove.
Yuck, really? Anyone else agree with this? "md5" and "sha" -- should note pointer to "hashlib". Eh, I am not going to worry about it since it is listed because of an existing deprecation so someone has already explained it for me. =) "base64"/"quopri"/"uu" -- still quite useful, so I'd suggest removing
them but retaining "binascii", with a new implementation that uses the "codecs" support directly.
Seems people want to hold on to either binascii or the trio of modules, but I need to understand why we shouldn't just rework them so that they are not public and have people use the codecs module. Thank God "asyncore" was 'saved'. =) I hate the renaming ideas, but I agree it's probably necessary. Yep. From now on at least people can come up with better names. If people have better names Let me suggest a consolidation idea I don't see there: a grouping
similar to that which has been done with email, but called "web". This package would include "urllib", "urllib2", "urlparse", "httplib", "cgi", "BaseHTTPServer", "BaseCGIServer", "HTMLParser", "Cookie", "cookielib", and "SimpleHTTPServer" (at least).
Done. The Python ECMAScript
interpreter could go there, too, when it's written :-).
Ugh, not if I can help it. -Brett
_______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
