On Saturday 04 March 2006 15:34, Tim Peters wrote: > Indeed! But whose arm could we twist to get them to repair the > compiler in 2.4? I'd settle for a blurb in the next 2.4 NEWS just > noting that 2.5 will follow the documented syntax. That may even > be desirable, to avoid breaking working (albeit by accident) code > across a micro release. I don't think a change like this should go into a 2.4.x release. It stands a very very high chance of breaking someone's code. I _could_ be convinced about a warning being emitted about it, though I'm not going to have the time to figure out the new compiler to do the work. Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <anthony at interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
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