On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Oleg Broytman <phd@phdru.name> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 08:28:41AM +1000, wu wei <wuwei23@gmail.com> wrote:
Every inclusion to the library adds overhead to finding and using elements of the library.
And supporting it. It's much harder to remove bits from stdlib than to add to it because stdlib have to maintain backward compatibility.
Oleg. -- Oleg Broytman http://phdru.name/ phd@phdru.name Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
It is a good point that those recipes because they are in the official docs are already requiring support and maintenance. However, as somebody above mentioned, there are many possible variations on those recipes and so it makes a lot more sense to tell people to implement their own version of grouper that will match their specific needs rather than create an infinitely configurable version of grouper in the stdlib. Furthermore, if the maintenance of those recipes ever becomes undesirable, it is a simple matter to strike them from the docs. The same cannot be said if they were inducted in the stdlib. Alexandre Zani