On Jul 28, 2015 10:41 PM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" <step...@xemacs.org> wrote: > > Ben Finney writes: > > > I've made a clear distinction between the need to *be able to* > > justify a change, versus arbitrary demands to do so by arbitrary > > members. > > > > The latter is what you're arguing against, and of course I agree. I've > > never advocated that. > > Sure, but the former, when stated as a rule rather than induced from > past cases, is also an unacceptably high bar. It's unnecessarily > high, because this is open source. No mistake is irrecoverable, even > if it happens in a public release. One can always keep using the last > release one liked.<wink/> Or maintain a local fork. Or switch to a > different language. Or <gasp/> live with the misfeature. > > The other face is that it's impossibly high. Some decisions can't be > justified rationally, because the theory isn't developed until later, > typically based on experience with an intuitively-approved feature. > In the end, some decisions really do come down to somebody's "gut > feeling". > > As I've already said, in the case of "assret" I *personally* think the > demands of accountability were higher than the mere repetition of > "it's a minor design decision" could satisfy. Nevertheless, I > wouldn't try to enunciate a rule.
* sorry, I haven't the context for this: would -m compileall or an AST preprocess help catch speling mistakes as well as syntax highlighting? * If the constraints are ill-defined, there are not enough tests; "Fearless Refactoring" > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > 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/wes.turner%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________ 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
