At 08:29 AM 9/13/2009 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > Could somebody please clarify the status of PEP 3124? At > > http://ftp.python.org/dev/peps/ , it is listed as "under > > consideration", but http://ftp.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3124/ says it > > has been deferred. > >This isn't really contradictory. "under consideration" means "in >progress": it has neither been accepted or rejected. > >If Phillip doesn't respond here, you may want to ask him directly. >My impression is that it is deferred because nobody is pursuing it >actively (including Phillip Eby). It's common for a PEP to be in that >state for several years, "deferred" then is an indication that readers >shouldn't expect a resolution in short term. > >That said: my personal feeling is that this PEP is way too large, and >should be broken into seperate pieces of functionality that can be >considered independently. There is a lot of stuff in it that isn't >strictly necessary to provide the feature listed in the rationale. It's deferred because the PEP needs a rewrite, and it isn't high on my priorities at the moment. It's also unlikely the rewrite will happen before PEAK-Rules reaches a non-alpha release status. (See http://ftp.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3124/#implementation-notes .)
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