On 29 October 2015 at 18:46, Laura Creighton <l...@openend.se> wrote: > In a message of Thu, 29 Oct 2015 18:27:59 +0000, Paul Moore writes: >>The idle issues seem to me to demonstrate that shadowing the stdlib is >>a bad idea. Of course, consenting adults, and if you override you're >>responsible for correctly replacing the functionality, and all that, >>but honestly, I don't think it needs to be *easy* to shadow the stdlib >>- there's nothing wrong with it being an "advanced" technique that >>people have to understand in order to use. > > I am actually sick of the 'consenting adults' argument. > I am dealing with '11 year old children trying to write their > first, third and tenth python programs'. For the life of me > I cannot see how convenience for the sort of person who has a > legitimate reason to shadow the syslib should get a higher priority > over these mites who are doing their damndest to write python > despite natural language barriers and the fact that their peers > and parents think they are nuts to want to do so.
That's actually a very good point, and I agree totally. To my mind, the point about "consenting adults" (and when I referred to that I was anticipating others using that argument, not proposing it myself) is that we don't *prevent* people from doing weird and wonderful things. But conversely, it's not a reason for making it *easy* to do such things. Quite the opposite - a "consenting adult" should be assumed to be capable of writing an import hook, or manipulating sys.path, or whatever. Paul _______________________________________________ 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
