Message 168960 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	petri.lehtinen
Recipients	eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, flox, petri.lehtinen, pitrou, rhettinger, thinred, vstinner
Date	2012-08-23.19:20:20
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<[email protected]>
In-reply-to

Content
The strict flag sounds good to me, too. I don't think it should be called "strict" though, as that would imply that we comply with RFC 4627 strictly (which is not true without passing allow_nan=False for dump() or passing a parse_constant function for load()). How about "encode_any" and "decode_any" or "any_value"? Deprecation doesn't sound good to me. If the feature is already there, it probably has its users and use cases.

The strict flag sounds good to me, too. I don't think it should be called "strict" though, as that would imply that we comply with RFC 4627 strictly (which is not true without passing allow_nan=False for dump() or  passing a parse_constant function for load()). How about "encode_any" and "decode_any" or "any_value"?

Deprecation doesn't sound good to me. If the feature is already there, it probably has its users and use cases.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2012-08-23 19:20:21	petri.lehtinen	set	recipients: + petri.lehtinen, rhettinger, pitrou, vstinner, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, flox, thinred
2012-08-23 19:20:20	petri.lehtinen	set	messageid: <[email protected]>
2012-08-23 19:20:20	petri.lehtinen	link	issue13212 messages
2012-08-23 19:20:20	petri.lehtinen	create