-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2014 02:50 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > I have seen a number of postings recently pointing to things as "not > until Python 4000" or "not until Python 4.0" (yours was not one that > I noticed, actually, this is a more general point). > > I do think it's a bad idea to start talking in terms of "the next big > compatibility break", even if *we* know there's no immediate plan. > People are very quick to pick up messages like "Now that Python 3 is > out of the way, the Python devs are talking about Python 4" which is > not a message we want to see getting traction. Exactly. If we can't do things sensibly / incrementally without learning from the painful lessons of the past eight years, we ought to give up on the prospect of doing language design altogether. > I'm neither averse to, nor in favour of, a Python 4 compatibility > break in due course I am. I don't think the community can stand another such break. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver at palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlMeHRsACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ4p0QCeLWgr2/qOSHmRBLLD+Wz0/+k/ EcwAn2p4lXARRCEYhyqsDpwhq/SrVEak =ZpwN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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