On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 June 2013 01:04, Thomas Wouters <tho...@python.org> wrote: >> If the .py file is going to be wrong or incomplete, why would we want to >> keep it -- or use it as fallback -- at all? If we're dead set on having a >> .py file instead of requiring it to be part of the interpreter (whichever >> that is, however it was built), it should be generated as part of the build >> process. Personally, I don't see the value in it; other implementations will >> need to do *something* special to use it anyway. > > Because practicality beats purity. This "wrong" Python code has been > good enough for all Python version up until 3.4, it makes sense to > keep it as a fallback instead of throwing it away.
How would you know if the Python you're running on has an incorrect bitflag? If the "wrong" code is simply incomplete (it has the standard flags but none of the contended ones), that would at least be safe - you'll never get a false flag, but you might be unable to recognize the platform-specific ones. And then the platform-specific modules would always be adding, never overwriting, bitflags. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
