Hi! David Scherer on idle-dev@python.org: [...] > in the interpreter* is fast. In principle, one could put THREE operators in > the language: one with the new "float division" semantics, one that divided > only integers, and a "backward compatibility" operator with EXACTLY the old > semantics: [...] > An outline of what I did: [...] Yes, this really clever. I like the ideas. [me]: > > 2. What should the new Interpreter do, if he sees a source file without a > > pragma defining the language level? There are two possibilities: [...] > > 2. Assume, it is a new source file and apply language level 2 to it. > > This has the disadvantage, that it will break any existing code. > I think the answer is 2. A high-quality script for adding the pragma to > existing files, with CLI and GUI interfaces, should be packaged with Python. > Running it on your existing modules would be part of the installation > process. Okay. But what is with the Python packages available on the Internet? May be the upcoming dist-utils should handle this? Or should the Python core distribution contain a clever installer program, which handles this? > Long-lived modules should always have a language level, since it makes them > more robust against changes and also serves as documentation. A version > statement could be encouraged at the top of any nontrivial script, e.g: > > python 1.6 [...] global python_1_5 #implies global old_division or global python_1_6 #implies global old_division or global python_1_7 #may be implies global new_division may be we can solve another issue just discussed on python_dev with global source_iso8859_1 or global source_utf_8 Cute idea... but we should keep the list of such pragmas short. > Personally, I think that it makes more sense to talk about ways to > gracefully migrate individual changes into the language than to put off > every backward-incompatible change to a giant future "flag day" that will > break all existing scripts. Versioning of some sort should be encouraged > starting *now*, and incorporated into 1.6 before it goes final. Yes. > Indeed, but Guido has spoken: > > > Great ideas there, Bruce! I hope you will post these to an > > appropriate mailing list (perhaps idle-dev, as there's no official SIG > > to discuss the Python 3000 transition yet, and python-dev is closed). May be someone can invite you into 'python-dev'? However the archives are open to anyone and writing to the list is also open to anybody. Only subscription is closed. I don't know why. Regards, Peter P.S.: Redirected Reply-To: to David and python-dev@python.org ! -- Peter Funk, Oldenburger Str.86, D-27777 Ganderkesee, Germany, Fax:+49 4222950260 office: +49 421 20419-0 (ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Str.8, D-28359 Bremen)
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