> As an aside, note that this backward compatibility is actually a > mixed blessing, because it means you don't have to update your > modules now, but there will come a time when it is going to bite > you. When new releases take features away, we will issue warnings as a gentle push. When they add features, I don't know why you *should* use the new features, unless you need them -- and then you have your motivation in your needs. > As a personal example: the MacPython toolbox modules haven't > been updated to make use of the GC stuff yet (and that's been > there since 2.0, no?), But the API was totally changed for 2.2, so you're actually lucky that you didn't do it for 2.0. ;-) > let alone the new type system. And these > are almost all generated, so it would probably only take a few > dozen lines of code to fix them. And the new type system would > be a real boon for some of the modules (such as the windowing > and dialog stuff), but because there's no real push (i.e. > everything still works) nothing has happened yet... I don't think *anything* can be done to force you to start using new optional features... Eventually classic classes will go away, but that will be a long time. --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