[Distutils] PEP 517 again
dholth at gmail.com
Mon Aug 28 16:13:31 EDT 2017
Then end the debate by letting the PEP authors decide the return type, and
write a paragraph explaining why the other options were rejected. It is not
going to make a big difference.
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 3:59 PM Thomas Kluyver <thomas at kluyver.me.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, at 08:50 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > My main motivation for wavering is that I thought agreeing to trust
> > the backend would simplify many of the decisions, and it's immensely
> > frustrating to me that we're still debating the same question in the
> > "return None" thread.
> The difference I see with the "return None" question is that there we
> have an alternative (return NotImplemented) which is just as simple for
> both sides, but avoids the identified issue with a buggy backend. The
> only argument there seems to be for using None is about semantics - and
> that's not a great argument, because 'practicality beats purity'.
> With the questions over sdist/wheel consistency, there's a complexity
> cost, for the spec and for frontends, in deciding that they can't. So
> we're weighing a trade-off: do we force ourselves to resolve the
> notimplemented question so that frontends can do sdist-wheel+fallback,
> or do we leave it up to frontends and risk some bugs which we might
> otherwise have prevented.
> Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Distutils-SIG