RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 21 15:01:17 CET 2007 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-March/072191.html

On 3/21/07, Facundo Batista <facundo at taniquetil.com.ar> wrote:
> So, as a resume of the choices we still need to settle:
>
>   a) Repeat the same functionality in 5 other libraries
>   b) Write the function in socket.py, public
>   c) Write the function in socket.py, non public

The fact that it's needed in 5 places in the stdlib suggests that
there's plenty of user code that could benefit from it too.  Hence, I
prefer (b), but if that really freaks people out, I'm okay with (c)
too.  I'm not okay with (a).

Thanks, by the way, for creating this patch (and updating it based on
python-dev feedback).  I think it's really important for the
maintainability of Python that duplicate code is factored out whenever
possible.

STeVe
-- 
I'm not *in*-sane. Indeed, I am so far *out* of sane that you appear a
tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity.
        --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-March/072191.html below:

Adding timeout to socket.py and httplib.py.