[Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict
"Martin v. Löwis"
martin at v.loewis.de
Fri Feb 17 23:13:14 CET 2006
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Fri Feb 17 23:13:14 CET 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Adam Olsen wrote: > Still -1. It's better, but it violates the principle of encapsulation > by mixing how-you-use-it state with what-it-stores state. In doing > that it has the potential to break an API documented as accepting a > dict. Code that expects d[key] to raise an exception (and catches the > resulting KeyError) will now silently "succeed". Of course it will, and without quotes. That's the whole point. > I believe that necessitates a PEP to document it. You are missing the rationale of the PEP process. The point is *not* documentation. The point of the PEP process is to channel and collect discussion, so that the BDFL can make a decision. The BDFL is not bound at all to the PEP process. To document things, we use (or should use) documentation. Regards, Martin
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list