Message240898
I agree with Raymond's recommendation - actually supporting this would mean adding code that would need to be maintained indefinitely without providing a compensating practical benefit, so I'm flagging this as "not a bug". Thanks Christian for nudging us to make a decision one way or the other.
If another implementation requests clarification, we might want to document that "directly callable-or-not" for these descriptors is formally an interpreter implementation detail, but in the absence of such a request, I think this issue serves as an adequate reference. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2015-04-14 14:53:36 | ncoghlan | set | recipients:
+ ncoghlan, barry, arigo, rhettinger, pitrou, chrish42, larry, Arfrever, r.david.murray, eric.snow, eryksun, ozialien |
2015-04-14 14:53:36 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1429023216.36.0.913353586727.issue20309@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2015-04-14 14:53:36 | ncoghlan | link | issue20309 messages |
2015-04-14 14:53:36 | ncoghlan | create | |
|