[Distutils] PEP 517 again
brett at python.org
Tue Aug 29 12:51:20 EDT 2017
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 at 16:29 Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Thomas Kluyver <thomas at kluyver.me.uk>
> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, at 09:13 PM, Daniel Holth wrote:
> > > Then end the debate by letting the PEP authors decide the return type,
> > > write a paragraph explaining why the other options were rejected. It
> is not
> > > going to make a big difference.
> > Will that work now? Are we all so tired of this endless war that people
> > sign a peace treaty written by the people whose names are on the PEP
> > (Nathaniel & me)?
> > If so, let the trumpets sound, and the heralds declare that "return
> > NotImplemented" is the way to do it. (I hope I've remembered Nathaniel's
> > preference right ;-)
> Fine with me, though if it turns out Donald and Nick prefer the
> version where the backend has to export an exception class then I'm
> fine with that too. (I'm basing this on -- Donald has said he likes
> it, and Nick hasn't commented yet but AFAICT it does address his
> concerns with NotImplemented, so it seem like a plausible outcome.)
I loathe to weigh in on this and add yet another voice in this discussion,
but the exported exception seems like the best solution for everyone
involved from my lurking perspective. For me, using NotImplemented is a
misuse of the singleton since I know what it's meant to be used for (and so
I cringe every time I hear it brought up as a solution). And I was fine
with NotImplementedError but if people want something more specific and
None is out due to worries of accidental bare returns, then the exported
exception comes the closest to making everyone happy (it does tick the
EIBTI box :) .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Distutils-SIG