On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> > wrote: > > On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 11:04:09 -0800 > > Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org> wrote: > >> > >> Along these lines, I've been contemplating proposing that Clinic > >> specifically understand "path" arguments, distinctly from other string > >> arguments, as they are both common and rarely handled correctly. My > >> main fear is that I probably don't understand all their complexities > >> either ;-) > >> > >> Anyway, this is certainly something we can consider *improving* for > >> Python 3.4. But for now I'm trying to make Clinic an indistinguishable > >> drop-in replacement. > >> > > [...] > >> > >> Naturally I agree Clinic needs more polishing. But the problem you fear > >> is already solved. Clinic allows precisely expressing any existing > >> PyArg_ "format unit"** through a combination of the type of the > >> parameter and its "flags". > > > > Very nice then! Your work is promising, and I hope we'll see a version > > of it some day in Python 3.4 (or 3.4+k). > > +1 for getting this into 3.4. Does it need a PEP, or just a bug > tracker item + code review? I think the latter is fine -- it's > probably better not to do too much bikeshedding but just to let Larry > propose a patch, have it reviewed and submitted, and then iterate. > It's also okay if it is initially used for only a subset of extension > modules (and even if some functions/methods can't be expressed using > it yet). > I don't see a need for a PEP either; code review should be plenty since this doesn't change how the outside world views public APIs. And we can convert code iteratively so that shouldn't hold things up either.
_______________________________________________ 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
