Hi, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > First, I'm not sure what it has to do with the stdlib. Preamble.
> I don't know if including something like Babel in the stdlib would be a > good thing. It depends on the size of it, and the required maintenance > (I suppose there is a continuous flow of patches, as long as new > languages/cultures get supported?). I'm not saying babel should go into the stdlib, it's just not a good idea. Maybe unicodedata could expose more information but that's where it ends. > Making locale being able to delegate to Babel sounds awkward. Just tell > people to use Babel if they need to (whether it is in the stdlib, or > not). Then at least some time and friends should have a flag to *ignore* the locale if that's somehow possible. > I would disagree indeed :) Yes, I already gave up. > Sure, but `dis` is used mainly by the core developers themselves, for > testing and development purposes, and for these uses it is fine. > Besides, it is certainly possible to propose an extension of the API so > as to direct the output to another file-like object. But that's something that can be changed as a paper-cut project, it's not hard. Just nobody really has the urge and time to do it. > This "call to arms" can be a good idea. But we have to be able to > channel it and appropriately review / validate the submitted changes. Of course. But code review should happen in general, not just for external contributions. > It depends what you mean by "refactor". It doesn't sound very precise :) > I think it's better to discuss proposed changes case by case rather than > trying to reach a consensus on such vague terms. That would have to be decided on a papercut-by-papercut base. And someone would have to select this modules first, which is why I mentioned the poll. Regards, Armin _______________________________________________ stdlib-sig mailing list stdlib-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig
