> > > And PEP numbers have a fourth purpose when used as jargon (this > applies to any numbered formal standard such as RFCs or ISO): they are > self-citing. In that sense, they are *inclusive*. They're an > invitation to learn more than you ever wanted to know about the things > the community cares about. >
using the PEP > > Apart from PEP 8, I don't know a single PEP id off by heart > > (not even the PEPs I have authored) > > I know more that that (off the top of my head, 0, 1, 7, 8, 263, 383, > 393, 484, and 3000, none of which I authored although I was extremely > noisy about 263), which is less than 2% I guess. I think some people simply remember numbers more than others -- I, for one, an NOT a number rememberer -- PEP8 is the only one I know off hand, including the one I wrote. which isn't to say the numbers aren't useful, just that it would be SO much more communicative to use the number (for easy look up) AND a brief description or title. Frankly, I get confused when there are discussion on this list (or python-dev, or) about currently PEPs in the midst of active discussion! Is is THAT hard to add a little text? And it's not just PEPs -- at work, I have to read a LOT of emails about the development of our Annual Operating plan, and most folks talk about "goal 4" or "goal 2", and I have a hard time keeping them straight -- and there are only 6 goals! -CHB -- Christopher Barker, PhD Python Language Consulting - Teaching - Scientific Software Development - Desktop GUI and Web Development - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/MQKULLDJWHCG22NWXINVVVCJQM3UOE7E/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
