On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info>wrote:
> On 21/06/13 01:35, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > >> 2013/6/20 Charles-François Natali <cf.nat...@gmail.com>: >> >>> 2013/6/20 Thomas Wouters <tho...@python.org>: >>> >>>> If the .py file is going to be wrong or incomplete, why would we want to >>>> keep it -- or use it as fallback -- at all? If we're dead set on having >>>> a >>>> .py file instead of requiring it to be part of the interpreter >>>> (whichever >>>> that is, however it was built), it should be generated as part of the >>>> build >>>> process. Personally, I don't see the value in it; other implementations >>>> will >>>> need to do *something* special to use it anyway. >>>> >>> > That's not correct. Other implementations can do exactly what CPython 3.3 > does, namely just use stat.py as given. Not all implementations necessarily > care about multiple platforms where stat constants are likely to change. > > > > That's exactly my rationale for pushing for removal. >>> >> >> +1 to nixing it. >> > > -1 > > Reading the Python source code is a very good way for beginner programmers > to learn about things like this. On the other hand, it is counter-productive to learn about code that is conceptually _wrong_.
_______________________________________________ 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
