Tim Peters wrote: > > [Michael McLay] > > I hope Python Labs doesn't rush Python 2.2 out early just to meet an > > artificial schedule. > > Given the effort that goes into making them up, there's nothing artificial > about them <wink>. > > > MAL's concerns about cluttering Python with several variations for > > spelling the same kind of feature is shared by me. > > It seemed to me MAL was worried about something else, namely not having to > redo the guts of his provisions for user subclassing of sundry mx objects > (coded in C). Right and as far as I understood your posting, there's nothing to worry about (which is good :-). OTOH, I would also like to use some of the new features for new code I write in Python and there things still look a lot less stable, which I find unfortunate. May be FUD and indeed I hope it is... Perhaps Guido should just write up a short list of features which he considers stable and another list of features which may still change in future Python releases. I suppose .__slots__ is one of the latter. Adding static class methods and the like probably too. While #ifdefs are easy in C, they're a nightmare in Python and I wouldn't want to start coding in an interface-driver pattern just to make Python code portable between releases (hey, I still support Python 1.5.2 for much of my stuff...). -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH ______________________________________________________________________ Consulting & Company: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
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