"Barry A. Warsaw" wrote: > > >>>>> "MM" == Michael McLay <mclay@erols.com> writes: > > MM> I hope the feature freeze won't rule out the patch for 2.2. > > Without BDFL override, yes, it does. > > >>>>> "TP" == Tim Peters <tim.one@home.com> writes: > > TP> I expect we will. Ditto __metatype__, long-winded super(), > TP> function-based property "declarations", and all the other new > TP> stuff. We're aiming for progress with the new features, not > TP> perfection <wink>. > > I believe Guido knows that it will be impossible to get all this stuff > right the first time, and even the 2.2 beta cycle won't shake out all > the problems. I think his intention was to get the basic > functionality in place for Python 2.2, and to clean up and improve the > syntax and semantics in future releases. I'd suggest that Guido marks those features he considers stable as such and clearly states which other features should still be condsidered experimental and not for production use. I intend to make some of the mx-datatypes subclassable but would want to have to support n different ways of implementing the details (I'll already have to support two different ways: classic and new style... wouldn't want to do classic, new style version 2.2, new style version 2.3, etc.) Thanks, -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH ______________________________________________________________________ Consulting & Company: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4