On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 13:40:36 -0500 Alexander Belopolsky <alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Michael Foord > <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > .. > >> I don't understand why everyone seem to have accepted Michael's > >> premise that "we don't have a clearly stated policy for what defines > >> the public API of standard library modules." We do have such a policy > >> and it is well known (while the location in the reference manual may > >> not be): > > > > Ha. 14 paragraphs into the grammar reference on the import statement is > > perhaps not where developers would go to look for Python standard library > > development policy.. > > Very true. To make it slightly more visible, any objections to the > following patch? (It adds "public names (in module globals)" linking > to that 14-th paragraph in the index.)
I think what Michael meant is that the language grammar reference is not (and shouldn't be) the authority on stdlib development policy. To which I would agree. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
