2011/4/20 R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com>: > On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:11:48 -0500, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> > wrote: >> 2011/4/20 <exar...@twistedmatrix.com>: >> > On 08:20 am, victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit : >> >>> >> >>> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations >> >>> > about the >> >>> > thread implementation. >> >>> >> >>> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why >> >>> does it have a leading underscore? >> >> >> > >> > Can I propose something wildly radical? Maybe the guarantees made about >> > whether an API will be available in future versions of Python (ostensibly >> > what "public" vs "private" is for) should not be tightly coupled to the >> > decision about whether to bother to explain what an API does? >> >> With what criteria would you propose to replace it with? > > I believe Jean-Paul was suggesting that just because an interface is > marked as "private" and might go away or change in the future does not > automatically mean it must also be undocumented. To which I say +1. > (Note that we already have a whole module like that: test.support.)
I think that test.* as a special case is private stuff. -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ 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
