[Python-ideas] itertools recipes: why not add them to the stdlib *somewhere*?

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Devin Jeanpierre writes:

 > I've never assumed that (obviously, I guess), and that isn't stated in
 > the docs. If that's the level of support of those recipes, this should
 > be made clear inside the itertools documentation,

It already is clear.  The very name "recipe" indicates that it may not
be to everyone's taste, that it's not carefully designed to handle
corner cases, and that people should review the code for their own
use.  The (very sparse) documentation associated with the recipes,
which is clearly oriented to advising you how you can (a) produce
similar code for different functions yourself and (b) make it better
further emphasizes what the name indicates.

Of course, all that may not be obvious to non-native speakers, but
that's a completely different issue from the starting point of this
thread, which was that these recipes belong in the stdlib rather than
in its documentation.  I have nothing to add to Terry's post
explaining why that is not appropriate for these recipes "as is."

 > because they _are_ used in peoples' code.

Of course they are.  That's what they're there for.