On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > I am working through the multiple bugs afflicting tokenize.untokenize, which > is described in the tokenize doc and has an even longer docstring. While the > function could be implemented as one 70-line function, it happens to be > implemented as a 4-line wrapper for a completely undocumented (Untokenizer > class with 4 methods. (It is unmentioned in the doc and there are currently > no docstrings.) > > I view the class as a private implementation detail and would like to treat > it as such, and perhaps even rename it _Untokenizer to make that clear. The > issue arises in #9974. It appears that a fix may require the addition of an > instance attribute or .add_whitespace parameter. If there is objection to > treating the whole class as private, I would at least like to treat > add_whitespace as the private helper that it is. There is no reason to call > it directly except for testing. Otherwise, it could just as well have been > left inline at the one call site.
Is this still an open question, Terry? -eric _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
