2009/9/16 Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info>: > I've been skimming emails in this thread, since most of them go over my > head and I have no current need for an ipaddress module.
Same here. > As an outsider to this argument, and judging from the lack of agreement > here, it seems to me that some (many? most?) developers who have need > of ipaddress functions are a little unclear about the difference, or > lack thereof, between addresses and networks. Is it our aim to pander > to such confusion, and have a module which will Just Work for such > users, even at the risk of sometimes accepting invalid input. Or is it > to have a module which is strict and forces the user to Do The Right > Thing, even at the cost of being less easy to use? > > For what it's worth, it seems to me that it would be better to have a > strict module in the standard lib, and leave the DWIM code to third > parties. As a non-expert, I find the confusion between network, address, address with mask, etc to be extremely unhelpful. I haven't looked to confirm if it's a confusion that only exists in the discussion, or if it's in the code as well. However, from my POV, I'd rather have a module that made the concepts clear and unambiguous, effectively educating me in the details of correct usage while I used it, rather than one that catered to my muddled thinking and allowed me to remain confused. Of course, the discussion seems to imply that even the experts have a confused view, so maybe I'm being too ambitious here :-) Paul. _______________________________________________ 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
