RetroSearch Browse

Tue Jul 12 02:55:48 EDT 2016 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-July/145586.html

On 12 July 2016 at 06:21, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Based on this discussion, I've come to the conclusion that there are
> only two cases where I'd like PEP 399 to document pre-emptive answers
> to "What counts as sufficiently compatible?" question

This sounds reasonable to me (particularly as it says that
implementations "should" do this rather than "must"). I think it would
be useful to see some explanation of *why* this is important included
as well, capturing the situation that prompted this thread, plus a
reminder that the *documented* API remains paramount but that we
prefer to avoid unexpected surprises for people working from
introspection where possible (hence these new recommendations).

Paul

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-July/145586.html below:

[Python-Dev] Proposal: explicitly disallow function/class mismatches in accelerator modules