RetroSearch Browse

Sat Jul 18 00:11:59 CEST 2015 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-July/140796.html

On 07/16/2015 11:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 17 July 2015 at 08:30, Ben Finney wrote:

>> By definition, advocating to not add cruft to an API is going to be in
>> advance of being bitten by those additions.
>
> That's not what people are doing. Folks are actually arguing for
> *restoring* the ability to mock out method names starting with
> "assret_*".

Why is that surprising?  As somebody already mentioned (Terry, I think?) "assret" is a fine abbreviation, as well as possibly being a foreign word.

> I still don't know why anyone thinks restoring that would be a
> worthwhile use of a maintainers' time (or why they thinking arguing in
> favour of such a capability is a worthwhile use of theirs).

1) Because it shouldn't have been added in the first place.

2) Because DWIM does not belong in Python.

> None of the perspectives presented in this thread are new, although
> the apparent obsession over such a minor detail has made it abundantly
> clear that this kind of helper simply isn't worth the distraction it
> creates for maintainers, *regardless* of whether or not it helps end
> users.

To be clear:

   - those who are upset over "assret" are not upset over "assert"

   - it is not Python's job (nor the stdlib's) to correct spelling errors

--
~Ethan~

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-July/140796.html below:

[Python-Dev] How far to go with user-friendliness