
Dec. 24, 2009
4:26 a.m.
David Lyon wrote:
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:31:09 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
Martin's point is that the PEP process doesn't *have* "reference" implementations. It has *sample* implementations. It may be useful to refer to a sample implementation as an example..
Fair enough. But otoh, asking for sample implementations on this type of project can skew the PEP towards a particular implementation or product.
Nobody is "asking" for sample implementations. Instead, I'm asking that what Tarek calls a "reference implementation" should be called a "sample implementation" instead. I'm asking for that precisely to avoid a skew towards a particular implementation. Regards, Martin