Home Original page

[Python-Dev] On the necessity of PEPs [was "collections.sortedtree"]

Eli Bendersky eliben at gmail.com
Thu Mar 27 03:11:49 CET 2014 
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org>wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014, at 14:25, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Mar 26, 2014, at 01:55 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> >
> > >It's not a bad idea. (I believe others have proposed an red-black tree.)
> > >Certainly, it requires a PEP and a few months of bikesheding, though.
> >
> > Generally, PEPs aren't necessary for simple or relatively uncontroversial
> > additions to existing modules or the stdlib.
>
> I would have said that, too, several years ago, but I think we've been
> requiring (or using anyway) PEPs for a lot more things now. OrderedDict
> had a PEP for example.
>

This is probably a natural outcome of the rising popularity of Python in
the last few years. Much more users, more core developers, more at stake...

>
> I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not.
>

YMMV but IMHO this is a good thing. PEPs provide a single point of
reference to a discussion that would otherwise be spread over multiple
centi-threads (not that PEPs don't create centi-threads, but they outlive
them in a way).

Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140326/0735e7b2/attachment.html>
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list