[issue10425] xmlrpclib support for None isn't compliant with XMLRPC

[Martin v. Löwis]

Martin v. Löwis <martin at v.loewis.de> added the comment:

In case it isn't clear from the discussion in issue8792: I'd be in favor of supporting extensions as long as their usage is an opt-in feature. The current nil support is already an opt-in feature. If alternative spellings of nil need to be supported, or other extensions, it might be necessary to refactor this extension support a bit, so that extensions can be independently be developed and activated.

As for Python's usage of nil: it is specified in

http://ontosys.com/xml-rpc/extensions.php

and also referenced in the Wikipedia. IMO, it would have been better if Apache had used the pre-existing extension, instead of coming up with its own (supposedly only because the pre-existing one wasn't namespace-based).

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue10425>
_______________________________________