Guido van Rossum wrote: > Please don't do this. We need stable APIs. Trying to switch the entire > community to use CapWord APIs for something as commonly used as > datetime sounds like wasting a lot of cycles with no reason except the > mythical "PEP 8 conformance". As I said, it's a pity we didn't change > this at the 3.0 point, but I think going forward we should try to be > more committed to slow change. Additions of new functionality are of > course fine. But renamings (even if the old names remain available) > are just noise. Even for 3.0, the only API I can recall doing this for was the threading module, and there we had the additional motivation of being able to add multiprocessing with only a PEP 8 compliant API while still having it be close to a drop-in replacement for the corresponding threading API. Having helped with that kind of rename once (and for a relatively small API at that), I'd want a *really* compelling reason before ever going through it again - it's messy, tedious and a really good way to burn volunteer time without a great deal to show for it at the end. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------
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