New Python block cipher API, comments wanted

Erik Max Francis max at
Wed Jan 29 08:18:00 CET 2003

Paul Rubin wrote:

> As for PEPs, I just looked at the existing ones; very few existing
> PEPs are about library modules, and hardly any existing library
> modules are described in PEPs.  Almost all the PEPs are about issues
> that affect Python internals.  Even the ones that are about libraries
> (like 272) seem mostly aimed at module implementers, not users.

PEPs are Python Enhancement Proposals; they are intended to justify (and
explain) an enhancement to the developer community, and namely to the
folk(s) that decide what goes into each release of Python.

> Library modules have usually been described for users in ordinary
> documentation, not PEPs.  Why do you want to suddenly start using PEPs
> in a way they haven't normally been used?

PEPs are not documentation for users, so I don't know what you're on
about here.

> Also, as I mentioned to David, there's already been a PEP for block
> ciphers (PEP 272) and it wasn't all that helpful.  I don't think
> anyone has ever implemented what it specifies.  Doing another one
> doesn't sound terribly worthwhile.  It's just going around in circles.

Why is it going around circles to revise the PEP that concerns this very
subject, fulfilling the very role for which PEPs were introduced? 
Revise the relevant PEP and make it will be accepted into the next

Why does this have to go _in_ Python, anyway?  Why not just release it
as separate module?

 Erik Max Francis / max at /
 __ San Jose, CA, USA / 37 20 N 121 53 W / &tSftDotIotE
/  \ Hell is other people.
\__/ Jean-Paul Sartre
    REALpolitik /
 Get your own customized newsfeed online in realtime ... for free!

More information about the Python-list mailing list