[Python-Dev] XXX do we need a new policy?

Thomas Wouters thomas at python.org
Tue Nov 4 10:39:27 CET 2008

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 07:04, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:

> > I see that Guido is not keen on the idea, and I'm not sure my
> > observations help sway things one way or the other.  OTOH, it would be
> > nice if at least we always add our own identifier (initials, nick, email
> > address) and a date to the XXX so we at least know who was talking about
> > what.
> I find it fairly easy to use "svn annotate" to learn about the source
> of an XXX comment. In many cases, the XXX comment is fairly obvious,
> anyway, so knowing who added it, and when, doesn't provide much useful
> information.

Ah, but that's not true in Subversion: you just see who committed the XXX
comment, not who wrote it :-) I've been using the XXX(twouters) approach for
a while and it's pretty convenient because who wrote the comment changes how
you interpret the comment. See for instance r42313 and r42717 of
Python/ceval.c: if I'd known the original comment was added by Jeremy, I
would have interpreted the question correctly the first time around. (As it
was, Jeremy came up to me at PyCon, I think :)

Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20081104/7ff0be6e/attachment.htm>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list