a comment about PEPs

[Michael Hudson]

philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk (phil hunt) writes:

> On Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:15:44 GMT, Michael Hudson <mwh at python.net> wrote:
> >philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk (phil hunt) writes:
> >
> >> Whenever I have a peek at c.l.p, there are usually several threads going
> >> suggesting improvements to the langauge.
> >> 
> >> Why is this?
> >
> >Because threads that start with "Python's fantastic!!" don't usually
> >garner many followups?  Same sort of thing as "no news is good news".
> >
> >The advantage of PEPs is if someone writes one and it gets rejected
> >there's a chance (and only a chance) of heading off the discussion the
> >next time around.
> 
> Who decides whether PEPs are approved/rejected? The BDFL?

More or less.  From PEP 1:

  Once the authors have completed a PEP, they must inform the PEP
  editor that it is ready for review.  PEPs are reviewed by the BDFL
  and his chosen consultants, who may accept or reject a PEP or send
  it back to the author(s) for revision.

Basically like any other language decision; Guido might listen to us,
but the D in his name means he doesn't have to.

Cheers,
M.

-- 
31. Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it.
  -- Alan Perlis, http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html