> This is really a pointer to the fact that some or all of the win32api > should be moved into the core - registry access is the thing people > most want, but there are plenty of other useful things that people > reguarly use... > > Guido objects to the coding style, but hopefully that wont be a big > issue. IMO, the coding style isnt "bad" - it is just more an "MS" > flavour than a "Python" flavour - presumably people reading the code > will have some experience with Windows, so it wont look completely > foreign to them. The good thing about taking it "as-is" is that it > has been fairly well bashed on over a few years, so is really quite > stable. The final "coding style" issue is that there are no "doc > strings" - all documentation is embedded in C comments, and extracted > using a tool called "autoduck" (similar to "autodoc"). However, Im > sure we can arrange something there, too. That's a good summary of the status quo. I would appreciate it if win32all could become part of the core. However the coding style issues need to be addressed (I also believe that it needs to be compiled in C++ mode). One concern that Mark doesn't mention is that there are some safety issues -- you can abuse some of the calls to cause segfaults, whether intentional or by mistake, and that's not a good thing. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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