[Python-Dev] The Trick
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Sat Oct 18 17:22:00 EDT 2003
> Can we dream of a standard library module of "neat hacks that
> don't really warrant a built-in" in which to stash some of these
> general-purpose, no-specific-appropriate-module, useful functions
> and classes? Pluses: would save some people reimplementing
> them over and over and sometimes incorrectly; would remove
> any pressure to add not-perfectly-appropriate builtins. Minuses:
> one more library module (the, what, 211th? doesn't seem like
> a biggie). Language unchanged -- just library. Pretty please?
Modules should be about specific applications, or algorithms, or data
types, or some other unifying principle. I think "handy" doesn't
> > (I know, by that argument several built-ins shouldn't exist. Well,
> > they might be withdrawn in 3.0; let's not add more.)
> "Amen and Hallelujah" to the hope of slimming language and
> built-ins in 3.0 (presumably the removed built-ins will go into a
> "legacy curiosa" module, allowing a "from legacy import *" to
> ease making old code run in 3.0? seems cheap & sensible).
Let's not speculate yet about how to get old code to run in 3.0.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-Dev