[Edu-sig] IDLE wish (was Edu-sig Digest, Vol 31, Issue 16)
glingl at aon.at
Fri Mar 3 23:34:52 CET 2006
ajsiegel at optonline.net schrieb:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Vern Ceder <vceder at canterburyschool.org>
>>I was asked submit the enhacements by Raymond Hettinger. I
>>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
>>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
> 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.
This statement seems to me, at least to say, a bit arrogant. Did you
ever use turtle.py in an educational setting? If so you surely had a
different view! You knew, for instance, that it has a number of serious
bugs. Things like this you call "approriately minimal".
Might it be rewarding for you, to supplement your opinion about
turtle.py with some practical experience?
> 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.
> Edu-sig mailing list
> Edu-sig at python.org
Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98
Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27
More information about the Edu-sig