Ilya Sandler schrieb: > I'd also suggest that request for test cases/docs comes after > (or together with) suggestion that a feature is desirable in the first > place. It depends. I was going through some old patches today, and came across one that added a class to heapq. I couldn't tell (even after reading the code) what precisely all implications are, so I was unable to proceed review beyond "please provide documentation saying what this is for". I would then be able to tell: a) whether it really does what it promises to do, and b) whether this is desirable to have I remember many occasions where a patch was rejected and never reconsidered (even after discussion on python-dev) because the submitter failed to clearly specify what the intention of the change was, as it turned out that the code didn't implement the intention, and people reviewing rejected it because they thought it was meant to do something else (namely, to do what it actually did). Regards, Martin
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