Thus spake Steve Holden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > It probably reflects personal preference, but it's a preference that > many people will maintain. I understand that PEP 008 was largely > directed at standard library authors and maintainers, but anything > that claims wide utility should have ambitions to be included in the > standard library, and hence PEP 008 conformance would be a plus.
Well, that's an entirely different conversation. Inclusion in the standard library has not always benefitted libraries - in fact, the standard library contains a number of examples of modules that have calcified due to the strict demands for interface backwards compatibility. Many of these could have been excellent if development and refactoring had continued. The library cleanup for Py3K may fix some of these problems, but then we're stuck again until, well, Py4K, and by then we'll all be too busy swanning about in our flying cars and having holidays on Mars to care. ;) So, no, I don't think inclusion in the standard library should be a universal ambition, and it's certainly not one I have for Pry. Regards, Aldo -- Aldo Cortesi M: +61 419 492 863 P: +61 1300 887 007 W: www.nullcube.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
