On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 7:39 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev <
python-dev@python.org> wrote:
> Whoa!
>
> I have an uneasy feeling about this PEP.
>
> AFAIK the usual procedure for adding a new feature to Python is:
> An idea is raised and attracts some support.
> Someone sufficiently motivated writes a PEP.
> The PEP is thoroughly discussed.
> Eventually a consensus (or at least an "agree to differ" stalemate)
> is reached.
> The PEP is accepted (if it is).
> (Then and only then) Someone works on the implementation.
>
That "then and only then" part is not correct. It just happens to be
typical due to people wanting to see if their idea has any support before
putting in the effort to actually code it up. Personally I sometimes wonder
if we should require a proof-of-concept upfront for all PEPs that introduce
a code change.
> etc.
>
> However, PEP 622 only seems to have been presented to the Python
> community only *after* a well-developed (if not finalised)
> implementation was built. A fait accompli. So there will inevitably be
> resistance from the developers to accept changes suggested on
> python-dev.
Then that's on them. But it may backfire if people don't like what there
PEP is presenting.
> And since the PEP has Guido's authority behind it, I think
> it is likely that it will eventually be accepted pretty much as it was
> originally written.
>
I'm trying to not take that as an insult, but I will say the steering
council does not rubber stamp Guido's PEPs. We do debate them and consider
them like any other PEP. It's not our fault he has a good sense of design
even in retirement. 😉 So as usual, once this PEP is ready for
consideration (which it isn't as stated by the PEP authors), we will
consider it like any other PEP that tries to change the language.
> This means that most of the discussion we have seen on python-dev (and
> there has been a lot) will end up being just pissing in the wind.
Once again, it is at the PEP author's peril to not listen to people's
suggestions and risk the PEP not being accepted due to the design not
meeting standards for acceptance. And they are still required to keep the
Rejected Ideas section of the PEP up-to-date or else the PEP will not be
considered.
> (I
> don't mean to be vulgar or disrespectful; I just can't think of another
> phrase that conveys my meaning so well.)
I think you're looking for "ignored".
-Brett
> And Guido's 2nd email ("PEP
> 622: Structural Pattern Matching -- followup") already to me (YMMV)
> reads rather like "OK, you've had your fun, now try not to joggle our
> elbows too much while we get on with the work".
>
> I don't know how many of the decisions made in the PEP are right and how
> many could be improved (it is of course a subjective question anyway).
> I do think it's a pity that the Python community did not have the chance
> to supply feedback earlier down the road (when IMO it would have been
> taken more seriously).
> While Guido and the other developers have obviously already put a huge
> amount of work into this PEP (and by now probably have a significant
> emotional investment in it), I do hope that they will take the time to
> consider seriously and on their merits most/all suggested changes,
> rather than being tempted to rush through the acceptance and
> implementation of the PEP.
>
> Best wishes
> Rob Cliffe
> _______________________________________________
> 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/IG4VNKZF4J7OR3L665PE26KL7L6SFQSQ/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
_______________________________________________
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/PWEGG4L4LV4GG3R5NLK7NV6NXBQJ2IQ4/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
