[Python-Dev] Forgotten Py3.0 change to remove Queue.empty() and Queue.full()

Tennessee Leeuwenburg tleeuwenburg at gmail.com
Sat Mar 7 00:42:08 CET 2009

I don't mind whether its "in" or "out", but as a language user I think it's
best to minimise undocumented interfaces.
According to that principle, if it's "in", then it should also work as
documented (and be documented), and be "supported". If it's "out" then it
should either be removed entirely or be marked "private" (i.e. leading
underscore, unless I'm mistaking my style guidelines).


On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote:

> [Martin v. Löwis]
>> I disagree that our users are served by constantly breaking the
>> API, and removing stuff just because we can. I can't see how
>> removing API can possibly serve a user.
> Am not following you here.  My suggestion was to remove the two
> methods in Py3.1 which isn't even in alpha yet.  This is for a feature
> that has a simple substitute, was undocumented for Py3.0, and had
> long been documented in Py2.x as being unreliable.
> It's seems silly to me that an incomplete patch from a year ago
> would need to wait another two years to ever see the light of day
> (am presuming that 3.1 goes final this summer and that 3.2 follows
> 18 months later). That being said, I don't really care much.
> We don't actually have to do anything.  It could stay in forever
> and cause no harm.
> Raymond
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tleeuwenburg%40gmail.com

Tennessee Leeuwenburg
"Don't believe everything you think"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20090307/db8f666e/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list