[Edu-sig] IDLE wish (was Edu-sig Digest, Vol 31, Issue 16)

ajsiegel at optonline.net ajsiegel at optonline.net
Fri Mar 3 19:49:47 CET 2006

----- Original Message -----
From: Vern Ceder <vceder at canterburyschool.org>
> I was asked submit the enhacements by Raymond Hettinger. I 
> foolishly 
> thought it might be good to ask for input on the nature of the 
> improvements before doing so. If you want to have an argument 
> about 
> whethe turtle.py should be in the standard library at all, I would 
> suggest you file a PEP or discuss it with the BDFL. It's far 
> beyond me.

Just to be clearer, I have assumed that the turtle.py module in the standaerd library
is exactly the turtle.py module that the BDFL had judged was appropriate for
the standard library.  And I never had a problem with it.  It is appropriately minimal.

IMO, a less minimal one is less appropriate.

Do you think I am arguing to argue, or do you at least believe that I mean
what I say. And for reasons that may be judged wrong,  but are not outlandish in
any possible way.

Which is why I think a PEP might be nice to see if there is anyone else out
there who sees it as I do.

Besides the fact that - before the issuance of the new memo I didn't get - that ,at least 
arguably, would just represent adherence to SOP. 


More information about the Edu-sig mailing list