Yury Selivanov writes: > Not sure about that... PEPs take a LOT of time :(
Informational PEPs need not take so much time, no more than you would spend on ceval.txt. I'm sure a PEP would get a lot more attention from reviewers, too. Even if you PEP the whole thing, as you say it's a (big ;-) implementation detail. A PEP won't make things more controversial (or less) than they already are. I don't see why it would take that much more time than ceval.txt. > I can write a ceval.txt file explaining what's going on > in ceval loop, with details on the opcode cache and other > things. I think it's even better than a PEP, to be honest. Unlikely to be better, since that's a subset of the proposed PEP. Of course it's up to you, since you'd be doing most of the work, but for the rest of us PEPs are a lot more discoverable and easily referenced than a .txt file with a short name. _______________________________________________ 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
