2009/9/18 Peter Moody <pe...@hda3.com>: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Andrew McNamara > <andr...@object-craft.com.au> wrote: >>>off to patch the pep and implement some of the non controversial changes. >> >> It might be a good idea to add some use-cases to the PEP. > > There are several use-cases in the PEP already. > > The problem is, for every use-case where one can show that the > existing implementation is confusing, I can come up with a use-case > showing where the existing implementation makes more sense than > anything proposed. > > Cheers, > /peter
For any given use-case there is bound to be an opposing one, but the goal is to satisfy the most common or relevant use-cases that we all experience - can't please all the people all the time etc. I think that alot of the confusion and disagreements surrounding the API are due to the absence of use-cases in the PEP - we can all probably agree an IP address module has intrinsic merit, but how we expect to use it may vary significantly. As a result the discussion seems to be driven by the example implementation, instead of the by the use-cases that make the module worthwhile being added - I would normally think it would be the other way round. Without a clear set of expectations and use-cases, it would also be hard to propose an alternate implementation. _______________________________________________ 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
