[Python-Dev] Policy on refactoring/clean up
vano at mail.mipt.ru
Tue Jun 26 08:25:29 EDT 2018
On 26.06.2018 14:54, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
> On 26.06.2018 14:43, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> On 2018-06-26 13:11, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
>>> AFAICS, your PR is not a strict improvement
>> What does "strict improvement" even mean? Many changes are not strict
>> improvements, but still useful to have.
>> Inada pointed me to YAGNI
>> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_aren%27t_gonna_need_it) but I
>> disagree with that premise: there is a large gray zone between
>> "completely useless" and "really needed". My PR falls in that gap of
>> "nice to have but we can do without it".
>>> You may suggest it as a supplemental PR to PEP 580. Or even a part of
>>> it, but since the changes are controversial, better make the
>>> refactorings into separate commits so they can be rolled back
>>> if needed.
>> If those refactorings are rejected now, won't they be rejected as
>> part of PEP 580 also?
> This is exactly what that the YAGNI principle is about, and Inada was
> right to point to it.
Strike this part out since he didn't actually say that as it turned out.
> Until you have an immediate practical need for something, you don't
> really know the shape and form for it that you will be the most
> comfortable with. Thus any "would be nice to have" tinkerings are
> essentially a waste of time and possibly a degradation, too: you'll
> very likely have to change them again when the real need arises --
> while having to live with any drawbacks in the meantime.
> So, if you suggest those changes together with the PEP 580 PR, they
> will be reviewed through the prism of the new codebase and its needs,
> which are different from the current codebase and its needs.
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> Python-Dev at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev