A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-February/013295.html below:

an alternative to the __future__ syntax

[Python-Dev] PEP 236: an alternative to the __future__ syntax [Python-Dev] PEP 236: an alternative to the __future__ syntaxTim Peters tim.one@home.com
Wed, 28 Feb 2001 17:42:16 -0500
[Martin v. Loewis]
> ...
> If you think this should be written down in a PEP,

Yes.

> I'd request that the specification above is added into PEP 236.

No -- PEP 236 is not a general directive PEP, no matter how much that what
you *want* is a general directive PEP.  I'll add a Q/A pair to 236 about why
it's not a general directive PEP, but that's it.  PEP 236 stands on its own
for what it's designed for; your PEP should stand on its own for what *it's*
designed for (which isn't nested_scopes et alia, it's character encodings).

(BTW, there is no patch attached to patch 404997 -- see other recent msgs
 about people having problems uploading files to SF; maybe you could
 just put a patch URL in a comment now?]




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