[Python-Dev] PEP 290 revisited

[Guido van Rossum]

> > If you want to help, pick one module at a time (it must be a module
> > that you know and use) and do a thorough style review on *all* aspects
> > of the module.  E.g. add docstrings, make sure docstrings conform to
> > PEP 8, use the latest builtins where it makes sense, use nested scopes
> > if it would clarify things, etc.  Also do a thorough review of the
> > module's test suite, making sure that all end cases are tested and
> > that all code in the module is actually tested (use coverage tools!),
> > adding tests when necessary.
> >
> > I know, that's much less fun and no quick satisfaction, but it leads
> > to code *improvement* rather than bitrot.
> 
> Yes, but it also means the folks doing the real work in a module are
> going to have to deal with this kind of stuff that probably seems
> trivial to them and not worth doing when they could be writing real
> code. It just means there is more on their plate and that Python
> itself, may not meet its own guidelines; these kinds of changes tend
> to not get done because there is never enough time.

I've never considered this a problem.  If the code isn't changed for
trivial reasons that means I still recognize it when I have to fix a
bug 3 years later.

> I am certainly not up for the level of involvement you are
> suggesting for a given module within the standard libs, nor do I
> think I have the level of knowledge and skills required, so I'll
> have to decline on that and just stick to the projects already on my
> plate.

That's okay.  You're doing good work on your own projects!

> The downside is that after a certain point, a Python programmer
> starts looking at the standard libs and common packages for
> inspiration and code to reuse in their own code, at least I know I
> did. That's where I picked up my use of the string module, types, ==
> None and != None, etc. A year and half later I'm getting around to
> cleaning this stuff up in my own code (and wxPython) when I see it,
> plus now I know better, but I would have preferred to see the
> "correct" way first. And yes I didn't discover the PEPs until long
> after I was already investigating and copying examples from the
> Python sources; that order of discovery may not be typical.

People who don't read documentation have no excuse. :-)

> Anyway, at least the level of involvement requirement is clear so
> those that want to step up to the plate, can.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)