On 4/12/07, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote: > Ralf, your issue is arising because of revision 53655 which fixes SF 1615701. I have backed out this change for 2.5.1. > Am leaving this open for others to discuss and decide. The old behavior was > surprising to some, but the revised behavior also appears to have some > unforeseen consequences. Anthony and I talked about this a bit. The current behavior seems less than optimal. However, changing it in a bug fix release seems particularly risky. > P.S. In addition to rev 53655, a number of similar changes were made to sets. Raymond, can you revert the changes? I looked in Objects/setobject.c and saw 53667. Is that the revision you are referring to? Are there any other revs? Thanks, n
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