[Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

[Eli Bendersky]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>wrote:

> Le 10/04/2014 20:58, Guido van Rossum a écrit :
>
>
>> Huh, I totally missed this (and I just gave Kushal a confused answer
>> when he asked me about it in person). Can someone please post here what
>> the plan is exactly? I don't want to press for a PEP, but I would at
>> least like to understand the plan for CFFI and PLY before it is
>> executed, since I have never had to use either one, and it feels like
>> each of these will require some commitment to maintenance once they are
>> in, in addition to cleanup before they go in.
>>
>
> FWIW, I do hope there would be a PEP before including CFFI... Actually I
> don't understand what would justify an exemption


There's absolutely no reason to exempt CFFI, IMHO. On the contrary -- the
dependence on other 3rd party modules (PLY and pycparesr), and the related
dilemma of whether to expose each/both as stdlib modules or hide as
internal implementation details -- makes a PEP even more important here.

Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140410/bd250d3a/attachment.html>