[Python-Dev] PEP 399: Pure Python/C Accelerator Module Compatibiilty Requirements

[R. David Murray]

On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 00:30:22 -0700, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> In the grand python-dev tradition of "silence means acceptance", I consider
> >>>> this PEP finalized and implicitly accepted.
> >>
> >> I haven't seen any responses that said, yes this is a well thought-out proposal
> >> that will actually benefit any of the various implementations.
> >
> > In that case it may well be that the silence is because the other
> > implementations think the PEP is OK.  They certainly voted in favor of
> > the broad outline of it at the language summit.
> 
> Sounds like it was implicitly accepted even before it was written or any of the
> details were discussed.

No, just the principle that something along these lines would be good.
Any final decision of course requires the actual PEP to look at, which
was also acknowledged at the summit.  My point was that lack of comment
from the other implementations *might* indicate they liked how the PEP
turned out.  But it might also mean they aren't paying attention, which
would be bad...

> The big picture of "let's do something to make life easier for other
> implementations" is a worthy goal.  What that something should be is still a bit
> ambiguous.

As I said in another email, I think the something that should be
done is to put CPython on equal footing implementation-pain-wise and
lets-make-this-work-wise with the other implementations.  The end result
will be better test coverage and clearer APIs in the stdlib.

--
R. David Murray           http://www.bitdance.com