On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 04:37:21 +0300 Ezio Melotti <ezio.melo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm not sure it's worth doing an extensive review of the code, a better > approach might be to require extensive test coverage (and a review of > tests). If the code seems well written, commented, documented (I think > proper rst documentation is still missing),
Isn't this precisely what a review is supposed to assess? > We will get familiar with the code once we start contributing > to it and fixing bugs, as it already happens with most of the other modules. I'm not sure it's a good idea for a module with more than 10000 lines of C code (and 4000 lines of pure Python code). This is several times the size of multiprocessing. The C code looks very cleanly written, but it's still a big chunk of algorithmically sophisticated code. Another "interesting" question is whether it's easy to port to the PEP 393 string representation, if it gets accepted. 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
