2009/9/13 Darren Dale <dsdal...@gmail.com>: >> If Phillip doesn't respond here, you may want to ask him directly. >> My impression is that it is deferred because nobody is pursuing it >> actively (including Phillip Eby). It's common for a PEP to be in that >> state for several years, "deferred" then is an indication that readers >> shouldn't expect a resolution in short term. > > That is why I asked, I wondered if it is being actively considered and > pursued, or if it had been deferred or worse abandoned. > >> That said: my personal feeling is that this PEP is way too large, and >> should be broken into seperate pieces of functionality that can be >> considered independently. There is a lot of stuff in it that isn't >> strictly necessary to provide the feature listed in the rationale. > > It would be nice to have a suitable foundation upon which more > elaborate third party dispatchers could build. The potential generic > functions have in a project like numpy are pretty exciting.
You may also be interested in http://bugs.python.org/issue5135 which is a (much) simpler attempt to introduce generic functions into the standard library. Generally, these things get stalled because the core developers don't have sufficient interest in the topic to do anything directly, and the arguments in favour aren't compelling enough to make a difference. Maybe the benefits numpy would get would help the case. Paul. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
