[stdlib-sig] standardizing the deprecation policy (and hownoisy they are)

geremy condra debatem1 at gmail.com
Tue Nov 10 00:44:59 CET 2009

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote:
> [Raymond]
>> . Further, the developer controlling the code
>> just may not care -- the script can be for single use, for a class
>> project,
>> or some other purpose that doesn't require being notified of what may
>> change in a later version of Python.
> [Geremy Condra debatem1 at gmail.com]
>> If they don't care, why does it matter whether they see it or not?
> There is a difference about not caring about the content of the warning
> versus caring about whether the messages clutter the screen.  Noise is
> always bad.

I don't really have a horse in this race one way or the other, but the idea
that we shouldn't put blinking lights and sirens on the crushomatic 9000
because people might eventually ignore them doesn't strike me as being
all that smart. If the warnings exist for a good reason, then they
constitute information and should be seen. If they don't, they constitute
noise and should be removed.

> There are legitimate reasons for not being interested in what is going to
> change
> in a future version of Python -- for those people, the messages are a
> distraction and nuisance.

And thats why you should be able to silence the warnings- which you
can currently do, if they bother you so much.

To me this seems like a lot of drama over a non-feature.

Geremy Condra

More information about the stdlib-sig mailing list