Victor Stinner <[email protected]> writes: > 2013年10月12日 Ben Finney <[email protected]>: > > Victor Stinner <[email protected]> writes: > > > >> For draft PEP, the identifier may change.
Note that this isn't a matter of the PEP being draft; once a PEP has a number, it deserves an official URL and (if I understand you correctly) a keyword. Then, *after* those official designations are associated with that PEP, another PEP can come along and be a better candidate for the same keyword. What use is a unique keyword-to-PEP mapping if it's not leading to the PEP most clearly associated with that keyword? > I would not be shocked if http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-enum/ > link is updated from the PEP 354 to the PEP 435, especially if both > PEPs are draft. On the other hand, what use is a keyword-to-PEP mapping if it isn't reliably going to persist over time? > Identifiers should be carefully chosen, "unicode" is maybe not the > best identifier for a PEP for example (they are many PEPs related to > Unicode). Right. I don't think it makes sense to have a keyword limited to exactly one PEP. > Hum, how are PEP numbers generated? PEP *354* and *435* for enum? > These numbers are not very random. We should check our PRNG :-) They're not random; they're sequential for the most part, IIUC. -- \ "The restriction of knowledge to an elite group destroys the | `\ spirit of society and leads to its intellectual | _o__) impoverishment." —Albert Einstein | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com