On Tuesday 11 July 2006 06:52, Tim Peters wrote: > > I don't think trying to produce the most stable and bugfree > > Python possible could in _anyway_ be considered "pedantry", and > > it makes me quite grumpy to have it described in that way. > > He meant that "no new features", while a useful guideline, can be > counterproductive if followed slavishly.
I'm not taking a slavish "no new features" line. I _am_ saying that any new features, post beta, require a good justification and a clear understanding of the risks that are added by the new code. In this case, the tradeoff is fine. Simply saying code is very low risk isn't enough - there also has to be a positive reason for the code going in. The ability to debug deadlocks is a good thing, and the clincher (once I sat and thought about it a bit) is that there is _already_ a module out there that attempts to do this, albeit in a buggy fashion. This is pretty clear indication that there is a demand for the feature. Similarly, the PyErr_WarnEx() is _probably_ a good thing to add in, because otherwise we can't do anything about the struct warning. But that really will have to wait until post-beta2 at this point. Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It's never too late to have a happy childhood. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
