On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 09:57:49 -0800 (PST), <aahz@panix.com> wrote:
> 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.
It is a release-critical goal, yes.
It's not an argument against adding attributes to range objects.
However, adding attributes to range objects is a no-go, and it got in by
mistake.
The list should be, of course, treated as a first rough draft. I'll post a
more complete list to p-d and p-l after it's hammered out a bit. Since
everyone who checkin stuff is on this mailing list, I wanted people
to review their own checkins first, to see I'm not making complete blunders.
Thanks a lot to Tim, Jeremy and /F for their feedback, by the way.
--
"I'll be ex-DPL soon anyway so I'm |LUKE: Is Perl better than Python?
looking for someplace else to grab power."|YODA: No...no... no. Quicker,
-- Wichert Akkerman (on debian-private)| easier, more seductive.
For public key, finger moshez@debian.org |http://www.{python,debian,gnu}.org
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