Message194770
| Author |
eli.bendersky |
| Recipients |
eli.bendersky, flox, jcea, pitrou, python-dev, scoder |
| Date |
2013年08月09日.20:34:08 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<CAF-Rda8ec59WxXkaXqmA=Q73nX-qusms09ib4uQ+_puu-ran-Q@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<1376076874.2646.25.camel@fsol> |
| Content |
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Antoine Pitrou <report@bugs.python.org>wrote:
>
> Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
>
> > Can we agree on discarding the current implementation for now and then
> > rewriting it based on a tree builder instead of a parser wrapper?
>
> Only if it actually brings something (feature-wise, performance-wise,
> maintenance-wise, whatever) that the current implementation doesn't
> have.
>
> Otherwise, I'd rather check in the simple inheritance-to-composition
> change.
>
> I'm sorry that you noticed this after the alpha. I would have had a
> lower threshold for changes if you had manifested when I proposed the
> feature.
>
Antoine, I'm not yet very well versed in the release process, but ISTM that
if:
1. We know that a better API can be created
2. The implementation is not overly difficult
It makes sense to do the change even though Alpha 1 was already released.
Alphas are alphas, after all :-) I suppose that we can consult with Larry
and others if this is the only doubt holding the change back. |
|