Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> added the comment:

While there isn't anything intrinsically wrong with using index(), the premise 
of this issue is essentially a claim that most Python code that uses int() is 
wrong.  That seems rather bold and flies in the face of common practices.  I 
don't really like the trend of constantly rearranging code in awkward ways to 
solve problems that no one actually has.

Also, I disagree with the notion that the downstream functions in the random 
module should be written in C.  That makes them more bug prone and opaque (like 
when Victor broken seeding for 3.6.0).  The trend for rewriting in C should be 
restricted to core building blocks like the underlying Mersenne Twister.  
Otherwise, we have to do dual maintenance for years and essentially advertise 
to people that we don't think our own language is good enough to use.  Over 
time, I am less and less able to show people standard library code as it has 
become complexified with coding strategies well beyond the norms of day to day 
Python programmers.  ISTM that most proposals to rewrite something in C come 
from folks who like rewriting things in C rather than from users or from people 
who do long term maintenance of the modules.  Sidenote: we're now getting new 
core devs who don't read or write C, so each transformation like them excludes 
their ability to participate).

----------
nosy: +tim.peters

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37319>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to