[Python-ideas] A proliferation of (un-)Pythonically programmatic pragmas
ncoghlan at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 05:30:27 EST 2017
On 14 November 2017 at 10:27, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017, 15:55 Steven D'Aprano, <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 06:37:05PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> > Brett Cannon wrote:
>> > > And possibly the easiest way to reach them is on the pyqa-dev mailing
>> > What's that? I can't find it on python.org, Gmane, or the Googles.
>> Brett may have meant
> Steve's right. http://meta.pycqa.org/en/latest/
I think that will be the right way to go about it, as this seems similar to
a lot of the problems that arise in the packaging interoperability space:
what really matters is what tool developers support in practice, so
documenting a proposed convention without a clear implementation plan
across common tools wouldn't really achieve a great deal.
This means that any new convention ideas need to be discussed and supported
by the tool developers, with python-dev & python-ideas really only getting
involved if some standard library adjustments are needed (e.g. updating
doctest to abide by any proposed conventions), or if the convention is
going to be captured as an informational PEP, rather than solely as a
recommended comment parsing library.
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas