On Sat, 16 Apr 2011 14:45:52 -0700 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 14:23, Stefan Krah <ste...@bytereef.org> wrote: > > > Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > > In the grand python-dev tradition of "silence means acceptance", I > > consider > > > this PEP finalized and implicitly accepted. > > > > I did not really see an answer to these concerns: > > > > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110672.html > > > > Antoine does seem sold on the 100% branch coverage requirement and views it > as pointless.
Not really. I think this is an unreasonable requirement because of the reasons I've stated in my previous messages :) If you rephrase it to remove the "100% coverage" requirement and replace it by something like "comprehensive coverage", then I'm ok. > Now if people would actually support simply not accepting any more C modules > into the Python stdlib (this does not apply to CPython's stdlib), then I'm > all for that. Hmm, what's the difference between "the Python stdlib" and "CPython's stdlib"? I'm also not sure how you would enforce that anyway. If it means using ctypes to interface with system C libraries, I'm -10 on it :) 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
