Victor Stinner writes:
 > 2016-10-12 11:34 GMT+02:00 INADA Naoki <>:

 > > I see.  My proposal should be another PEP (if PEP is required).
 > I don't think that adding a single method deserves its own method.

You mean "deserves own PEP", right?  I interpreted Nick to say that
"the reasons that applied to PEP 367 don't apply here, so you can Just
Do It" (subject to the usual criteria for review, but omit the PEP).

I'm not sure whether he was channeling Guido or that should be
qualified with an IMO or IMHO.

Python-Dev mailing list

Reply via email to