Tim Peters wrote: > > ... > Nobody has been more vocal in support of these (& augmented assignments) > than me, but I very strongly doubt they'll be in 1.6. In the interests of > getting that out the door, Guido considers the 1.6 feature set to be frozen > already. Is there an argument for putting in features with flaming red neon lights: "warning, experimental, use at your risk." We want to follow a bazaar (if not outright bizarre) development strategy after all. Putting a patch "out there" really doesn't do much about having people really play with and comment on a feature. I would never have experimented (and decided against using...) metaclasses if they hadn't popped up as an experimental feature. Of course if there is a decent chance of breaking something already in there that works then that's another issue... > I think part of the pressure to get one more feature in Python (again & > again & again) is that release cycles have been soooooo protracted, now > slobbering well over the full year mark. Nah, no matter how quick you do the turnarounds, nobody wants to wait for their favorite feature. :) -- Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself Floggings will continue until morale improves.
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