RetroSearch Browse

Tue Jul 28 06:24:57 CEST 2015 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-July/141035.html

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:

> […] The "meta" of "special cases aren't special enough to break the
> rules" is that no design decision that violates it should be dismissed
> as "minor".

Thank you. That dismissal was very upsetting; essentially telling Python
users that their concerns for a clean API in the standard library aren't
worth much to the Python core developers.

> In context of a mailing list, doing so is going to be taken by readers
> as "I know what I'm doing, and you don't know what you're talking
> about, so STFU."

That may not have been the intent. It certainly was how it was received
by some of us here.

> *Both* roles in this comedy of errors are natural, they are inherent
> in human cognition (citations on request), and nobody is to be blamed.

Since it can't seem to be said enough, I agree with what Stephen's
saying here wholeheartedly: the above explications are not intended as
blame, but an explanation of why calls to “stop talking about this, it's
minor” had precisely the opposite effect.

-- 
 \       “Remember: every member of your ‘target audience’ also owns a |
  `\   broadcasting station. These ‘targets’ can shoot back.” —Michael |
_o__)               Rathbun to advertisers, news.admin.net-abuse.email |
Ben Finney

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-July/141035.html below:

[Python-Dev] How do we tell if we're helping or hindering the core development process? (was Re: How far to go with user-friendliness)