[Guido]
> ...
> A future statement makes no sense for this,
Do you really want to give up the chance to tell your son that
from __future__ import None
once meant something in Python? That would be a great hack, esp. because in
2.4 it would also require horrid new trickery to ensure that it continued to
work despite that None *would* be a keyword then <wink>.
> so I guess all we can do in 2.3 is warn about use of None in all
> contexts except in expressions.
In that case there's really no point to changing the grammar now either,
right? This is a context-sensitive warning. In that case, I'd like us to
start warning about (at least) "non-expression" uses of 'True' and 'False'
too. That is, if we can't change the generated code yet anyway, we may as
well start warning about everything we *intend* to make keywords someday.
The same context-senstive checks are needed for each such name.
> This is really too bad -- I wish we could decide to just break code
> (since it's a clean break) but apparently that's unacceptable to the
> users.
Delay 2.3 by 2.3 years and call it "Python 3" <0.9 wink>.
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