Message167052
On Jul 31, 2012, at 02:56 PM, Eric Snow wrote:
>Part of the problem with the import nomenclature is that PEP 302 doesn't
>really nail it down and mixes the terms up a bit. This is understandable
>considering it broken ground in some regard. However, at this point we have
>a more comfortable relationship with the import system. Would it be feasible
>to lightly update PEP 302 to have a more concrete and consistent use of
>import terminology?
Maybe not an update to PEP 302, but probably a big red warning that the
terminology is out of date, with a reference to the import system
documentation in the reference manual.
This also points out an interesting, more general problem, with PEPs that get
out of date doesn't it? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-07-31 21:04:25 | barry | set | recipients:
+ barry, brett.cannon, georg.brandl, ncoghlan, pitrou, larry, eric.araujo, skrah, python-dev, eric.snow |
2012-07-31 21:04:23 | barry | link | issue15295 messages |
2012-07-31 21:04:20 | barry | create | |
|