Barry A. Warsaw added the comment:

On Jul 31, 2012, at 02:56 PM, Eric Snow wrote:

>Part of the problem with the import nomenclature is that PEP 302 doesn't
>really nail it down and mixes the terms up a bit.  This is understandable
>considering it broken ground in some regard.  However, at this point we have
>a more comfortable relationship with the import system.  Would it be feasible
>to lightly update PEP 302 to have a more concrete and consistent use of
>import terminology?

Maybe not an update to PEP 302, but probably a big red warning that the
terminology is out of date, with a reference to the import system
documentation in the reference manual.

This also points out an interesting, more general problem, with PEPs that get
out of date doesn't it?

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15295>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to