Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict

Steve Holden steve at holdenweb.com
Sun Feb 19 04:57:35 CET 2006 
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> 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.
> 
>
One could wish this ideal had been the case for the import extensions 
defined in PEP 302.

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden       +44 150 684 7255  +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC                     www.holdenweb.com
PyCon TX 2006                  www.python.org/pycon/
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list