On Jan 7, 2014, at 1:33 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On mar., 2014-01-07 at 13:18 -0800, Eli Bendersky wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Does it really make sense to introduce large amounts of code churn >> after the release of 3.4 beta2? It started innocently enough, but now >> it seems that the whole implementation is being reconsidered >> (Antoine's email to pydev). This doesn't look like something we should >> be doing so late in the release process. >> >> Are we really that much in need of convert-to-clinic *now*? > > I guess the question is: are there large enough benefits to be reaped > for risking the release (a bit)? > There's no question Argument Clinic can bring interesting benefits, it's > just a question of timing. Let me play the devil’s advocate here: how much do we risk in future maintainability costs if we move to Argument Clinic in Python 3.5 and leave large parts of Python 3.4 uncovered by it? I mean that we can get some ugly diffs between code using Argument Clinic and manual argument parsing. -- Best regards, Łukasz Langa WWW: http://lukasz.langa.pl/ Twitter: @llanga IRC: ambv on #python-dev _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
