[Python-Dev] Proposed schedule for 3.4.2

Glenn Linderman v+python at g.nevcal.com
Tue Sep 9 06:32:32 CEST 2014

On 9/8/2014 8:41 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>   > Why not provide _urlopen_with_scary_keyword_parameter as the
>   > monkey-patch option?
>   >
>   > So after the (global to the module) monkeypatch, they would_still_  have
>   > to add the keyword parameter.
> I understand the hardline position, though I don't like it: "if you
> don't know how to do it yourself, we won't help you do it at all."[1]
> But this "defense in depth" suggestion really violates the "consenting
> adults" principle.  One warning in the docs and another in the name
> itself should be enough, and if it isn't, Mommy should take Jimmy's
> RaspberryPi away.
I was assuming, because of the suggestion for a monkey patch at all, in 
response to Guido's suggestion of a keyword parameter, that there was a 
problem adding a keyword parameter to urlopen. If there is, then the 
combo above could be useful in making them track down and adjust the 
places that need it, without forcing them to adjust the places that 
don't need it? If there is not, then no need for the monkey patch at 
all, they can just change add the keyword parameter.

If the alternate function doesn't have an extra keyword parameter, the 
monkeypatch solution would be the "easy" way to apply the change 
globally, even to places that don't need it, or optionally don't need 
it... too big a hammer. Having the extra parameter also might make them 
not apply it globally, and think more about what and why they are doing 
what they are doing.

Whatever, the idea is out there. If no one likes it, let it die.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140908/b27fca85/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list