On 11/2/06, Mike Orr <sluggoster at gmail.com> wrote: > Given the widely-diverging views on what, if anything, should be done > to os.path, how about we make a PEP and a standalone implementation of > (1) for now, and leave (2) and everything else for a later PEP. Why write a PEP at this stage? Just release your proposal as a module, and see if people use it. If they do, write a PEP to include it in the stdlib. (That's basically what happened with the original PEP - it started off proposing Jason Orendorff's path module IIRC). >From what you're proposing, I may well use such a module, if it helps :-) (But I'm not sure I'd vote for it in to go the stdlib without having survived as an external module first) Paul.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4