Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But that's precisely why it would be valuable to have a PEP -- a > central catalog of such conventions makes it possible for checking > software to be consistent. If PyChecker were going to check for such > things, it would do so only because a standard convention had been > established.
I'm saying such a PEP should not be approved unless there's already an implementation (e.g. PyChecker patch). If the PEP is then approved, the patch should be merged into the official PyChecker source. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
