On 9/8/2014 8:41 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Why not provide _urlopen_with_scary_keyword_parameter as the
> monkey-patch option?
>
> So after the (global to the module) monkeypatch, they would_still_ have
> to add the keyword parameter.
I understand the hardline position, though I don't like it: "if you
don't know how to do it yourself, we won't help you do it at all."[1]
But this "defense in depth" suggestion really violates the "consenting
adults" principle. One warning in the docs and another in the name
itself should be enough, and if it isn't, Mommy should take Jimmy's
RaspberryPi away.
I was assuming, because of the suggestion for a monkey patch at all, in
response to Guido's suggestion of a keyword parameter, that there was a
problem adding a keyword parameter to urlopen. If there is, then the
combo above could be useful in making them track down and adjust the
places that need it, without forcing them to adjust the places that
don't need it? If there is not, then no need for the monkey patch at
all, they can just change add the keyword parameter.
If the alternate function doesn't have an extra keyword parameter, the
monkeypatch solution would be the "easy" way to apply the change
globally, even to places that don't need it, or optionally don't need
it... too big a hammer. Having the extra parameter also might make them
not apply it globally, and think more about what and why they are doing
what they are doing.
Whatever, the idea is out there. If no one likes it, let it die.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
