[Python-Dev] PEP 298

[Guido van Rossum]

> Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes:
> 
> > There are doubts about its usefulness.  (AKA YAGNI.)  Would you also
> > provide implementations for common object types?  Otherwise there
> > wouldn't be a point, right?
> 
> Not really, IMO. It is an interface, not an implementation (except that
> there are 3 helper functions in abstract.c).
> 
> I have patches ready for string and unicode objects (trivial), and
> started a patch for arrayobject. This is more involved, because the
> array must be locked while a buffer pointer is out somewhere.
> 
> I could also implement it for mmap objects, there are comparable issues.
> 
> Maybe the most useful object type would be the upcoming bytes object
> (PEP 296).  It seems, this will not be included in 2.3, but it could also
> be implemented as a separate extension - impossible for the locked buffer
> interface, which must be included into the core.
> 
> If you call YAGNI, it's ok for me, that's why I'm asking. Better save
> the time in this case...

Well, I have no personal need for it.  If you're the only one, that
sounds like a big YAGNI to me...

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)