Martin Panter added the comment:

Why do people want “response_class” to be part of the API? If so, more details 
about it may need to added, e.g. the following methods and attributes seem to 
be required: _read_status(), fp, close(), isclosed(), begin() and will_close.

The “debuglevel” attribute seems fairly redundant with the existing 
set_debuglevel() method.

Also, what is the point of adding the “default_port” attribute, if it cannot be 
modified? The only use case I can imagine is in a subclass that specifically 
does modify it. But I’m not sure it should be added at all.

So I am sorry, but I don’t see why any of the three additions in the patch 
should be made. IMO it would be better to explain that “response_class” is an 
internal implementation detail, or even drop it entirely from the doc string.

----------
nosy: +vadmium

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue13456>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to