On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 05:09:36AM +0900, Eregon (Benoit Daloze) wrote:
> 
> Issue #7097 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).

[snip]

> >  If we implement these 4 new method in my patch, our API footprint is
> >  only increased by 4 new methods (vs 5 methods + a new object type).  If
> >  we find later on that exposing an object is a good thing, we can easily
> >  implement these 4 methods in terms of the new object and deprecate the
> >  4 methods.  Going in the other direction, deprecating an object, is not
> >  so easy.
> >  
> >  I don't particularly care what the method names are (since we can just
> >  alias them later), but I'm firmly against exposing a new object.
> 
> I see, this was a bold suggestion (which I made because I would greatly prefer that API), but it has too much drawbacks and complexity.
> Thank you for answering it in details.

No problem!  Thank you for reviewing my patch.  I appreciate the
feedback. :-)

-- 
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/