On 07/16/2015 11:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 17 July 2015 at 08:30, Ben Finney wrote:
By definition, advocating to not add cruft to an API is going to be in
advance of being bitten by those additions.
That's not what people are doing. Folks are actually arguing for
*restoring* the ability to mock out method names starting with
"assret_*".
Why is that surprising? As somebody already mentioned (Terry, I think?)
"assret" is a fine abbreviation, as well as possibly being a foreign word.
I still don't know why anyone thinks restoring that would be a
worthwhile use of a maintainers' time (or why they thinking arguing in
favour of such a capability is a worthwhile use of theirs).
1) Because it shouldn't have been added in the first place.
2) Because DWIM does not belong in Python.
None of the perspectives presented in this thread are new, although
the apparent obsession over such a minor detail has made it abundantly
clear that this kind of helper simply isn't worth the distraction it
creates for maintainers, *regardless* of whether or not it helps end
users.
To be clear:
- those who are upset over "assret" are not upset over "assert"
- it is not Python's job (nor the stdlib's) to correct spelling errors
--
~Ethan~
_______________________________________________
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
