> > This one Aahz singled out previously as a canonical example of a > > patch he would *not* include, because adding new attributes seemed > > potentially disruptive to him (but why? maybe someone was depending on > > the precise value of len(dir(xrange(42)))?). > > I'm not sure about this, but it seems to me that the attribute change > will generate a different .pyc. If I'm wrong about that, this patch > as-is is fine with me; otherwise, I'd lobby to use the containment fix > but not the attributes (assuming we're willing to use part of a patch). Adding attributes to xrange() can't possibly change the .pyc files. > >From my POV, it's *real* important that .pyc files be portable between > bugfix releases, and so far I haven't seen any argument against that > goal. Agreed with the goal, of course. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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