Message299821
A grep through the codebase shows that RawConfigParser.items() is the only .items() method in the stdlib which accepts arguments.
This is annoying as a stdlib user because when I see the arguments being passed to RawConfigParser.items(), I have _no idea_ what they do. Instinctively, I do not expect .items() to take arguments, and I have to go and work out what it does each time.
I think it would be both easier to understand, and more consistent with general Pythonic practice, if the two codepaths in RawConfigParser.items() were split in to separate methods; one which takes no arguments (which will continue to behave as it does today when called that way) and one which is named in a way that makes it clearer what it does (and takes arguments). |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2017-08-07 03:28:30 | odd_bloke | set | recipients:
+ odd_bloke |
2017-08-07 03:28:30 | odd_bloke | set | messageid: <1502076510.54.0.648446505741.issue31129@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2017-08-07 03:28:30 | odd_bloke | link | issue31129 messages |
2017-08-07 03:28:29 | odd_bloke | create | |
|