On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:49 PM, geremy condra wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Guido van Rossum
<gu...@python.org> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:31 AM, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Let me rephrase- I'm not asking end users to silence them, I'm
saying that if it annoys the end users so much, the devs should
do it themselves.
So either way the developers must be aware of the warnings.
I don't understand how default suppressing all warnings implies
that a developer "must" be aware of them.
In your proposal, every developer must add a special hack to
their code as distribute, which they must disable when they test.
You only need the "special hack" (I'd point out that its in the
standard library docs) if you're running deprecated code. Leave
it off until a warning comes up, then decide what you're going
to do about the warning, then suppress it. The important thing
was that you were made aware of the problem and then made
a conscious decision to do something about it, rather than
being totally unaware of the problem until it became an error.
That's no better than no warnings at all.
So you are saying that developers should re-release their software
when a new python release happens just to put some code to disable
warnings? It does take effort to make a software release, and every
time you do one is a chance to screw things up (even python had
releases issues). For me it is unacceptable.
3) As I've said before, if you don't think the warnings are
important info, then ask pylint and pychecker to take them
up and take them out of Python. That's the case where
there isn't any burden on either the conscientious dev or
the end user.
Good that you agree on taking the warnings out of python :)
--
Leonardo Santagada
santagada at gmail.com
_______________________________________________
stdlib-sig mailing list
stdlib-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig
