Re: RFC: Extend psycopg2.connect to accept all valid parameters?

On 17/11/11 12:49, Daniele Varrazzo wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Federico Di Gregorio <fog@dndg.it> wrote:
>> > On 17/11/11 12:39, Daniele Varrazzo wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Federico Di Gregorio <fog@dndg.it> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> > Never said doing it in Python is wrong. In fact anything that isn't
>>>>> >>> > time-critical (type conversions, etc.) at this point is OK in Python.
>>> >> I was also thinking that having the pair connect()/_connect() is
>>> >> perfect for regression testing: _connect() can be replaced with a stub
>>> >> to test the arguments conversion without really connecting.
>> >
>> > Wunderful. But please don't rename the C function. Just "import as", to
>> > avoid breaking API (not that I ever encountered Python code using
>> > _psycopg.so directly but one never knows...)
> I wanted to rename it because I've dropped its support to the keyword
> arguments: the interface (which is not an API: if sb is using
> _psycopg.so he is doing at his own risk) is broken anyway. And because
> we are not going to use the C keyword codepath, I want to drop it
> altogether: it is not going to be maintained anymore.

Agreed.

--
Federico Di Gregorio                                       fog@initd.org
            Bhoe, bhe, bhe. Sono brutto e cattivo. Brutto lama! -- Cuzco