On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info>wrote:
> > - Each scheme ended up needing to be a separate function, for ease of both > implementation and testing. So I had four private median functions, which I > put inside a class to act as namespace and avoid polluting the main > namespace. Then I needed a "master function" to select which of the methods > should be called, with all the additional testing and documentation that > entailed. > That's just an implementation issue, though, and sounds like a minor inconvenience to the implementor rather than anything serious; I don't think that that should dictate the API that's used. - The API doesn't really feel very Pythonic to me. For example, we write: > And I guess this is subjective: conversely, the API you're proposing doesn't feel Pythonic to me. :-) I'd like the hear the opinion of other python-dev readers. Thanks for the detailed replies. Would it be possible to put some of this reasoning into the PEP? Mark
_______________________________________________ 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
