Éric Araujo <mer...@netwok.org> added the comment: Copied from msg143857:
> There are a lot of little internal routines in the standard library > that aren't sufficiently fit to be exposed (perhaps a little too > ad-hoc or special purpose, perhaps the API isn't sufficiently > general, perhaps the routines rely on non-guaranteed aspects of the > implementation). For example, visiblename() is more heuristic than > algorithmic -- right now, we can change that as needed (for instance, > the recent updates to accommodate named tuples), but as soon as the > method or function becomes public, its API freezes and it is hard for > us to make changes. I agree with your general point. For this particular case, I’d be okay if you wanted to reject the request. Users can filter the output of dir depending on their needs (_private names, __magic__ names, etc.). For more useful code (that can cope with named tuples for example), I think generic functions would be a nice way to do this. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue12917> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
