Message204034
| Author |
ncoghlan |
| Recipients |
dstufft, loewis, ncoghlan, ned.deily |
| Date |
2013年11月23日.14:38:48 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<CADiSq7ftX7UST=p0Xbyey41285C7ykuydPsEuHOtq35GykN7_A@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<CADiSq7fQiiOzE2dSwDmdYGpk-qzf9pqUJDmmq=ekBzoVz+y7qQ@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content |
As far as updating the PEP goes, it's a rare PEP indeed that is implemented
exactly according to spec - the integration process almost always uncovers
details that don't quite work out the way we thought they would.
For minor issues, we usually handle such changes without updating the PEP -
the issue tracker and the reference docs become the authoritative source.
Larger issues get discussed again on python-dev, and may lead to PEP
updates or even an additional PEP. That's pretty rare, though, as it
requires the original PEP discussion to miss something big. |
|