> > Would it be outrageous to suggest deprecating the last five rows? > Why bother? All that does is outdate a bunch of documentation. He suggested to deprecate it, not to remove it. By the time it is removed, the documentation still mentioning it should be outdated for other reasons (e.g. the string module might have disappeared). In general, the rationale for deprecating things would be that the simplification will make everybody's life easier in the long run. In the case of a small change (such as this one), that advantage would be small. OTOH, the hassle for users that rely on the then-removed feature will be also small; I see it as quite unlikely that anybody uses that feature actively (although I do think that people use 0X10 and 100L; the latter is common since 100l is oft confused with 1001). Regards, Martin
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