On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 08:14:33PM -0000, Dennis Sweeney wrote: > I think my confusion is about just how precise this sort of "reference > implementation" should be. Should it behave with ``str`` and ``tuple`` > subclasses exactly how it would when implemented? If so, I would expect the > following to work:
I think that for the purposes of a relatively straight-forward PEP like this, you should start simple and only add complexity if needed to resolve questions. The Python implementation ought to show the desired semantics, not try to be an exact translation of the C code. Think of the Python equivalents in the itertools docs: https://docs.python.org/3/library/itertools.html See for example: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0584/#reference-implementation https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0572/#appendix-b-rough-code-translations-for-comprehensions You already state that the methods will show "roughly the following behavior", so there's no expectation that it will be precisely what the real methods do. Aim for clarity over emulation of unusual corner cases. The reference implementation is informative not prescriptive. -- Steven _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/F5Z24BQF5MNHL6BPIQGGIXGH23ZEREFA/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
