On Aug 29, 2011, at 06:40 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>I like the 3k numbers myself :))
Me too. :) But I think we've pretty much abandoned that convention for any new
PEPs. Well, until Guido announces Python 4k. :)
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
On Aug 29, 2011, at 06:55 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>These things tend to get somewhat clumsy over time, though. What about a
>stdlib change that only applies to CPython for some reason, e.g. because no
>other implementation currently has that module? I think it's ok to make a
>coarse-grained dist
Barry Warsaw, 29.08.2011 18:24:
On Aug 29, 2011, at 11:03 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
Also, this PEP makes me wonder if there should be a way to distinguish
between language PEPs and (CPython) implementation PEPs, by adding a
tag or using the PEP number ranges somehow.
I've thought about this,
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:38:23 +0200
Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 18:24, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >>Also, this PEP makes me wonder if there should be a way to distinguish
> >>between language PEPs and (CPython) implementation PEPs, by adding a
> >>tag or using the PEP number ranges
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 18:24, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>Also, this PEP makes me wonder if there should be a way to distinguish
>>between language PEPs and (CPython) implementation PEPs, by adding a
>>tag or using the PEP number ranges somehow.
>
> I've thought about this, and about a similar split be
On Aug 29, 2011, at 11:03 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>Also, this PEP makes me wonder if there should be a way to distinguish
>between language PEPs and (CPython) implementation PEPs, by adding a
>tag or using the PEP number ranges somehow.
I've thought about this, and about a similar split betwee
