RetroSearch Browse

Sun Feb 27 13:10:49 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/051798.html

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:31:26 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis"
<martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > Are you sure about that?  Contriving examples is easy, but download a
> > few modules, scan them for use cases, and you may find, as I did, that
> > partial() rarely applies.  The argument order tends to be problematic.
> 
> So would you like to see the decision to accept PEP 309 reverted?

Either revert the decision, or apply the patch. I don't feel
comfortable advocating that the decision be reverted - according to
the CVS log, PEP 309 was accepted by Guido on 31 March 2004, so I
don't think it's for me to argue against that decision...

(I've already stated my position - I don't have any problem with the
function as it stands, and speed is not crucial to me so I have no
preference between the C and Python implementations. But it's not the
end of the world whatever happens...).

Paul.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/051798.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 309