[Python-ideas] Documenting Python warts on Stack Overflow

[Terry Reedy]

I consider Anatoly's post to be off-topic, obnoxious, and best ignored.

On 12/30/2012 5:20 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:

I am only responding because Eli and then Victor responded, largely 
repeating things that have been said before (and ignored) on many of the 
same issues.

> 2012/12/26 anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com>:
>> I am thinking about [python-wart] on SO.

The purpose of python-ideas is to discuss possible ideas for improving 
future versions of Python and the reference CPython implementation, 
including its included documentation.

Announcements of independent personal activities are off topic. 
Announcements of thoughts about such activities are, to me, even more 
so. I have lots of thoughts about things I *might* do, and I am sure 
many others do too. Should we all post them here? I think not. I am 
actually working on, not just thinking about, a book that showcases many 
of the positive features of Python. But I do not think that an 
announcement post here is particularly on-topic.

As for 'obnoxious', this is not just a post about thoughts, but of 
thoughts to abuse another forum to trash python, and a trashy 
justification for doing so.

>> There is no currently a list of
>> Python warts, and building a better language is impossible without a clear
>> visibility of warts in current implementations.

There is, of course, a tracker with, at the moment,3771 open issues. 
That is already too many. Repeatly regurgitating closed issue is an 
obnoxious distraction.

> Sorry, but what is a wart in Python?

A Python behavior that Anatoly does not like and that the CPython 
developers cannot, will not*, or have not yet# changed. By extension, 
our disliked-by-him actions are also warts. This ego-centric view is 
more of 'obnoxious'.

* Perhaps because we consider the whole community, not just one person.

# Perhaps because of ignorance or lack of interest.

Berating us for not doing something that he will also not do (write a 
patch) is more of 'obnoxious'.

>> Why Roundup doesn't work ATM.
>> - warts are lost among other "won't fix" and "works for me" issues

One can easily search the tracker for closed issues with any particular 
resolution. One can even limit the search for such issue with 
'techtonik' on the nosy list. Results:
'rejected' 17
'invalid' 17
'won't fix' 10
'works for me' 17
The numbers are smaller if 'techtonik' is entered instead in the creator 
box. This is the core list of issues Anatoly would consider 'lost 
warts'. They are not lost, just not prominently displayed to the world 
in the way he would like.

Spreading disinformation is more of 'obnoxious'.

>> - no way to edit description to make it more clear

There is no description field. The title of an issue and other 
descriptive headers can be edited and often are. There is an audit trail 
of changes. The description of a issue can be and sometimes is re-stated 
by the original author or others in successive messages. As a matter of 
audit trail policy, messages cannot be edited. They can be deleted from 
an issue (and that fact noted, and by who) but not (normally, anyway) 
from the database.

So, more disinformation. Calling a disagreement over policy a 'wart' is 
disengenous.

>> - no voting/stars to percieve how important is this issue

Proposed and rejected before. Again: the devs don't do what Anatoly 
wants, its a wart.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy