[Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0292.txt,1.11,1.12

[bwarsaw at users.sourceforge.net]

Update of /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv14356

Modified Files:
	pep-0292.txt 
Log Message:
Latest update.


Index: pep-0292.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps/pep-0292.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -d -r1.11 -r1.12
--- pep-0292.txt	20 Aug 2004 14:20:38 -0000	1.11
+++ pep-0292.txt	23 Aug 2004 03:31:45 -0000	1.12
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 Type: Standards Track
 Created: 18-Jun-2002
 Python-Version: 2.4
-Post-History: 18-Jun-2002, 23-Mar-2004
+Post-History: 18-Jun-2002, 23-Mar-2004, 22-Aug-2004
 
 
 Abstract
@@ -161,6 +161,12 @@
     run-time.
 
 
+Reference Implementation
+
+    A SourceForge patch[4] is available which implements this
+    proposal, include unit tests and documentation changes.
+
+
 Open Issues
 
     - Should the Template and SafeTemplate classes convert mapping
@@ -172,7 +178,7 @@
       Should this raise an exception such as TypeError, or should this
       return the string 'The cose was 7 euros'?
 
-      PEP author preference: no automatic stringification.
+      Proposed resolution: no automatic stringification.
 
     - The pattern for placeholders in the Template and SafeTemplate
       classes matches Python identifiers.  Some people want to match
@@ -185,7 +191,7 @@
       the standard library?  What about more complex patterns such as
       Python expressions?
 
-      PEP author preference: No, we don't include them for now.  Such
+      Proposed resolution: No, we don't include them for now.  Such
       classes are easily derived, and besides, we're not proposing to
       include any interpolation mappings, and without such a
       specialized mapping, a pattern matching attribute paths or
@@ -197,8 +203,8 @@
       re-organization of the existing string module, turning it into a
       string package.
 
-      PEP author preference: There seems little consensus around
-      either suggestion, and since the classes are just a few lines of
+      Proposed resolution: There seems little consensus around either
+      suggestion, and since the classes are just a few lines of
       Python, I propose no string module re-organization, but to add
       these two classes to string.py.
 
@@ -208,9 +214,8 @@
       was that we add another matching group which matches bare $'s,
       raising a ValueError if we find such a match.
 
-      PEP author preference: This sounds fine to me, although because
-      the pattern is part of the public interface for the class, we
-      will have to document that 4 groups are expected instead of 3.
+      Proposed resolution: There seems to be consensus for strictness
+      on the grounds of explicit is better than implicit.
 
 
 References
@@ -224,6 +229,8 @@
     [3] Guido's python-dev posting from 21-Jul-2002
         http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-July/026397.html
 
+    [4] Reference Implementation
+        http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1014055&group_id=5470&atid=305470
 
 Copyright