On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 07:27 pm, Tim Golden wrote: > FWIW I'm broadly with Antoon here: wider-ranging discussions can be > interesting and useful.
Sure. But sometimes conversations are going nowhere: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y http://www.montypython.net/scripts/argument.php [...] > If it becomes clear that the poster is in fact pushing for a change > (either intelligently thought-out or naively ill-considered) then I > would push them towards Python-ideas sooner than later, because that's > exactly the purpose of *that* mailing list. People on python-ideas want > to go to and fro over the relative merits of proposals. Specifically, I > believe that's the only mailing list which GvR follows apart from > python-dev. Any discussion here would likely have to be repeated over > there anyway, so why not go there earlier on? Informally, ideas are supposed to have an initial "sanity check" here to avoid the really silly ideas: Q: "Suggestion: I'm sick of writing for key, value in other_dict.items(): mydict[key] = value I think that dicts should have a method to copy all the keys and values from another dict." A: "You mean dict.update?" Or perhaps: Q: "I think that object oriented programming is too inefficient. I think that Python should get rid of all the objects and just be a lightweight, easy-to-read wrapper around C, with the same semantics and limitations as the 1988 C standard." A: "Surely you aren't serious?" But most people don't bother passing ideas through here first, they just go straight to Python-Ideas. -- Steven -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
