Bobby Impollonia <bobbyi at gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Raymond Hettinger > <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote: > > To start with, it doesn't hurt for a maintainer to add an __all__ > > entry and to only document the parts of the API we think need to be > > exposed. That way, we can at least declare the parts that are > > intended to be public on a go-forward basis. > > This does hurt because anyone who was relying on "import *" to get a > name which is now omitted from __all__ is going to upgrade and find > their program failing with NameErrors. This is a backwards compatible > change and shouldn't happen without a deprecation warning first. It also introduces a (perhaps small, but clearly non-zero) maintenance burden: the name of an object must be added, changed, and removed not only where it is defined, but also in the ‘__all__’ entry. This burden is avoided when using the spelling of the name itself as the indicator for exposure in the API. -- \ “In any great organization it is far, far safer to be wrong | `\ with the majority than to be right alone.” —John Kenneth | _o__) Galbraith, 1989-07-28 | Ben Finney
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