Kevin Jacobs <jacobs@penguin.theopalgroup.com> writes: > Pointless semantic arguments aside, I agree with Skip. I don't care how > many other ways we provide to spell types: until the types module is > depricated, I do not see why it should be intentionally broken by not > covering all builtin types (unless thus breaking the module is a slimy way > of encouraging its deprication, in which case I will object on procedural > grounds). Nobody suggested to break the types module; not adding BooleanType would not break it. 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