https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0637/
Thank you Stefano and Jonathan for a very carefully written and thought-out
PEP. I trust that the background etc. are representing past discussion, so
I am going to focus on the spec itself. Fortunately I only have a few nits,
really. (If you submit new PRs to the peps repo, one of the PEP editors
will merge it quickly without questions, as long as the markup passes the
tests.)
- I recommend that you carefully look over the PEP as rendered on python.org
(link above) and try to fix any markup oddities. E.g. some comments are
line-wrapped, which looks ugly, and some bulleted lists have an extra blank
line above.
- Looking at the generated ToC, you have two top-level sections labeled
"Syntax and Semantics". That seems a bit odd. I'm not sure what you meant
to happen here, but I recommend renaming at least one of these. (Another
recommendation: don't mix description of the status quo with the
specification.)
- While I can understand the desire to keep C function names short, I don't
see we should continue the tradition of using the meaningless 'Ex' suffix
for API variations that take an additional dict of keywords. Looking
through the existing APIs, I recommend
PyObject_{Get,Set,Del}ItemWithKeywords instead. (Note you have a typo here,
"DetItem". Also I recommend adding markup (e.g. bullets) so each signature
is on a line by itself.
That's it from me!
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
Pronouns: he/him (why is my pronoun here?)
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/OU5BHOWYNNSNLA6SKSXMUZ7N7XTP4SDD/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
