Why "from __future__" stinks; a counter-offer

[Moshe Zadka]

On 19 Mar 2001, Joshua Marshall <jmarshal at mathworks.com> wrote:
 
> As responses to suggestions, there's a lot of "write up a PEP or it
> won't get implemented" going around.  I can understand this, but it's
> also important that good ideas don't go to waste just because the
> proposer _didn't_ write a PEP.

Previously, the proposer had to write an implementation before even
being considered. Writing a PEP is much easier, and Barry even corrects
deviations from the PEP format himself: nonbody in PythonLabs would
make sure your C code compiles <wink>
 
> I guess I just hope that the PEP-mechanism doesn't make it so that
> good proposals get overlooked in favor of proposals with enthusiastic
> proponents.

Good proposals have always been overlooked in favor of proposals with
enthusiastic proponents. The PEP process *levels* the playing field:
with just enough time to write a document (which takes about 30 minutes,
modulu thinking up a coherent proposal), all the proposals are mentioned
in the same place, where everyone can look at them.

-- 
"I'll be ex-DPL soon anyway so I'm        |LUKE: Is Perl better than Python?
looking for someplace else to grab power."|YODA: No...no... no. Quicker,
   -- Wichert Akkerman (on debian-private)|      easier, more seductive.
For public key, finger moshez at debian.org  |http://www.{python,debian,gnu}.org