RetroSearch Browse

Fri Mar 27 04:44:49 CET 2009 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-March/087738.html

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Greg Ewing
<greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> I'll gladly take that as an added rationalization of my plea not to
>> change datetime.
>
> In the case of datetime, could perhaps just the
> module name be changed so that it's not the same
> as a name inside the module? Maybe call it
> date_time or date_and_time.

I don't think that's advisable ATM -- again, something we should have
done for 3.0, but now it's too late.

I really don't want to set a trend where 3.1 is backwards incompatible
with 3.0 *except* in cases where we were really planning to kill
something in 3.0 and accidentally forgot to quite remove it completely
(like cmp()).

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-March/087738.html below:

[Python-Dev] Adding PEP consistent aliases for names that don't currently conform