kxroberto <kxrobe...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
I think really ill/strange is that kind of item _assignments_ do _add_
multiple.
If msg[field] = xy would just add-first/replace-frist , and only
msg.add_xxxx/.append(field, xy) would add multiples that would be clear and
understandable/readable.
(The sophisticated check dictionary is unnecessary IMHO, I don't expect the
class to be ever smart enough for a full RFC checklist.)
e.g. I remember a bug like
msg[field] = xy
if special_condition:
msg[field] = abc # just wanted a alternative
Never ever expected a double header here!
"=" with adding behavior is absurd IMHO. Certainly doesn't allow readable code.
----------
nosy: +kxroberto
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue10839>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
