[Python-ideas] Documenting Python warts on Stack Overflow

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Terry Reedy writes:
 > 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.

+1

 > > 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.

I think it would be fair to s/included//.  See the doc site search
engine thread, which nobody (including you) seems to think off-topic.

 > Announcements of independent personal activities are off topic.

Not at all.  Announcing a PyPI project and requesting testing for
potential stdlib inclusion, for example.  Doesn't fit exactly, but
what's the preferred venue?

 > Announcements of thoughts about such activities are, to me, even more 
 > so.

It's the lack of any pre-posting filter whatsoever, combined with a
lack of patches, that leads me to ignore Anatoly.  This is more of the
same.  Nevertheless, a desire for a list of "important unsolved
problems" is common (cf Ryan's post).

 > > 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.

That is apparently Anatoly's operational definition, yes.  However,
it's easy to define conceptually.  A wart in Python is an un-Pythonic
functionality, or an un-Pythonic implementation of functionality.  The
print statement was a wart.  It was an interesting idea, like
syntactic indentation.  The former didn't work for Python, the latter
did and still does.[1]

That makes it clear to me why Anatoly's proposal is perverse.  The
word "Pythonic" itself cannot be defined by stars on a Roundup issue
or user posts to StackOverflow.  Ultimately it's defined by Guido, I
suppose, but by now many developers have been shown to have an
excellent sense, sufficient to get Guido to change his mind on
occasion.  It is not, however, a matter for democratic decision.

The word "wart" itself is useful, when used by those know what
"Pythonic" means.  It's a warning: you will break your teeth if you
just try to bite it off.  So it's not very useful in guiding the work
of new developers, because the bar is high and the benefits small.
Most warts in Python 3 (and there are far fewer than Anatoly seems to
think) will have to wait for Python 4, absent solutions of true
genius.


Footnotes: 
[1]  As a way of tweaking the nose of paren-lovers, if nothing else.