On 24/05/10 20:46, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Cameron Simpson writes: > > > There's a lot to be said for a robust implementation of a well defined > > problem. Brian's module, had it been present and presuming it robust and > > debugged, would have been quite welcome. > > That, of course, is the consensus view, both in general and with > respect to this particular module. > > The difference is over what constitutes sufficient evidence for your > presumption of "robust and debugged" from the point of view of the > users of the stdlib. At the very least, we'll be offering a promise to be "more robust and more debugged than what you came up with in that coding marathon last night" ;) Having a decent test suite that is regularly executed on multiple platforms (which will be the case for any accepted module by the time it is included in a Python release) also places anything we release a cut above a *lot* of in-house code. 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