[Python-Dev] Suggest reverting today's checkin (recursive constant folding in the peephole optimizer)

["Martin v. Löwis"]

> Maybe, but we have historically tended to give some extra weight to the
> primary author of at least modules and packages.  If someone wanted to make
> a significant change to xml.etree, I think we would give reasonably large
> weight to Fredrik Lundh's opinion on the change.  If the peephole optimizer
> is largely Raymond's work, why should that be treated any differently?  Is
> it just because it can't practically be distributed outside of Python proper
> the way ElementTree can?

These cases are certainly different. For Elementtree, /F has explicitly
asked that it be included into Python only under the condition that he
has the last say in all changes, and that the only exception to this
would be urgent security fixes, or systematic changes that apply to all
modules.

Whether such a privilege should have been granted in the first place is
a different question, but I personally feel obliged to honor it, until
some of the involved parties change their minds.

I don't think any of the regular core committers got any such explicit
veto powers on any code, and I don't think it should be granted to
anybody.

Regards,
Martin