<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    On 26.06.2018 14:54, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:<br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:055c6d1a-d8dd-74a5-3eaf-d28251cab448@mail.mipt.ru">On
      26.06.2018 14:43, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite">On 2018-06-26 13:11, Ivan Pozdeev via
        Python-Dev wrote:
        <br>
        <blockquote type="cite">AFAICS, your PR is not a strict
          improvement
          <br>
        </blockquote>
        <br>
        What does "strict improvement" even mean? Many changes are not
        strict improvements, but still useful to have.
        <br>
        <br>
        Inada pointed me to YAGNI
        (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_aren%27t_gonna_need_it">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_aren%27t_gonna_need_it</a>) 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".
        <br>
        <br>
        <blockquote type="cite">You may suggest it as a supplemental PR
          to PEP 580. Or even a part of
          <br>
          it, but since the changes are controversial, better make the
          <br>
          refactorings into separate commits so they can be rolled back
          separately
          <br>
          if needed.
          <br>
        </blockquote>
        <br>
        If those refactorings are rejected now, won't they be rejected
        as part of PEP 580 also?
        <br>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      This is exactly what that the YAGNI principle is about, <strike>and
        Inada was right to point to it</strike>.</blockquote>
    <p>Strike this part out since he didn't actually say that as it
      turned out.</p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:055c6d1a-d8dd-74a5-3eaf-d28251cab448@mail.mipt.ru">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.
      <br>
      <br>
      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.
      <br>
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________
        <br>
        Python-Dev mailing list
        <br>
        <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Python-Dev@python.org">Python-Dev@python.org</a>
        <br>
        <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev">https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev</a>
        <br>
        Unsubscribe:
        <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru">https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru</a>
        <br>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Regards,
Ivan</pre>
  </body>
</html>