RetroSearch Browse

Sun May 23 01:12:46 CEST 2010 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-May/100263.html

On 22 May 2010, at 23:59, R. David Murray wrote:

> On Sat, 22 May 2010 19:12:05 +1000, Brian Quinlan  
> <brian at sweetapp.com> wrote:
>> On May 22, 2010, at 5:30 AM, Dj Gilcrease wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Brian Quinlan <brian at sweetapp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Except that now isn't the time for that discussion. This PEP has
>>>> discussed
>>>> on-and-off for several months on both stdlib-sig and python-dev.
>>>
>>> I think any time till the PEP is accepted is a good time to discuss
>>> changes to the API
>>
>> I disagree. If a PEP is being updated continuously then there is
>> nothing stable to pronounce on.
>
> Well, you've been making updates as a result of this round of
> discussion.

Yes, I've been making documentation and PEP updates to clarify points  
that people found confusing and will continue to do so.

> If there is still discussion then perhaps the PEP isn't ready for
> pronouncement yet.  At some point someone can decide it is all
> bikeshedding and ask for pronouncement on that basis, but I don't
> think it is appropriate to cut off discussion by saying "it's ready  
> for
> pronouncement" unless you want increase the chances of its getting
> rejected.

Here are the new proposed non-documentation changes that I've  
collected (let me know if I've missed any):

Rename "executor" => "executer"
Rename "submit" to "apply"
Rename "done" to "finished"
Rename "not_finished" to "pending"
Rename "FIRST_COMPLETED" to "ONE_COMPLETED"

We can discuss naming for all eternity and never reach a point where  
even half of the participants are satisfied.

Since naming has been discussed extensively here and in stdlib-sig, I  
think that we have to decide that it is good enough and move on. Or  
decide that it isn't good enough and reject the PEP.

Cheers,
Brian

> The usual way of doing this (at least so far as I have observed, which
> granted hasn't been too many cases) is to say something like "I think
> this PEP is ready for pronouncement" and then wait for feedback on  
> that
> assertion or for the pronouncement.  It's especially good if you can  
> answer
> any concerns that are raised with "that was discussed already and we
> concluded X".  Bonus points for finding a thread reference and adding
> it to the PEP :)
>
> --
> R. David Murray                                      www.bitdance.com

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-May/100263.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 3148 ready for pronouncement