On 14 Feb, 10:15 pm, greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Giampaolo Rodol� wrote:
for me it should also fit one crucial requirement: it
should be *simple* and reflect the simplicity and "taste" of all other
stdlib modules, and to fulfill such a requirement I think Twisted
probably needs to be "adapted" a bit.
My thoughts exactly -- from a bird's eye view, Twisted appears
to be very far from simple. While there may be some good ideas
to adopt from it, I suspect that finding them will require just
as much careful thought as designing an API from scratch.
Can you try to be more constructive? Generalizations like this don't
help the process at all. They don't explain why Twisted's APIs
shouldn't be adopted in the stdlib and they don't explain what APIs
_should_ be adopted. It's basically just stop energy.
I'm not picking on Giampaolo because despite the small portion of his
message you quoted, his full email actually contained quite a bit of
useful technical information. It wasn't just an unsupported snipe.
As far as the difficulties of "finding" the good ideas in Twisted goes,
there are several people familiar with Twisted already contributing to
this thread. Between us all, I'm sure we can dig out the insidiously
buried secrets. As I mentioned before, I've also started a PEP myself
to lay bare the mysteries. I may try working on it some more, since
there seems to be some interest.
Jean-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
