RetroSearch Browse

Tue Jul 16 04:20:35 CEST 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-July/127344.html

On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 11:25 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> 
> If your code has no obvious, documented convention at all for what's internal and what is not, they are no worse off.
> 
> If you do have a documented convention for internal implementation details, then you are no worse off. "I have better things to do than PEP8-ify old, working, stable code" is a perfectly acceptable answer. "I have better things to do than PEP9-ify old, working, stable code, but if you want to provide regression tests and a working patch, I'll let you do so" might be an even better one :-)

Welp, I guess I'm logically boxed in then.  Thanks for showing me the
errors in my thinking.  Should be no problem to manage the updating of
that 500K lines of public code.

/scarcasm

- C

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-July/127344.html below:

[Python-Dev] Tweaking PEP 8 guidelines for use of leading underscores