On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Leo Soto M. <leo.soto at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Leo Soto M. <leo.soto at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: >>>> Given that in Python 3.0 __cmp__ is going away, I'm not sure how much >>>> it all matters -- but if you care, as long as it's supported at all, >>>> you might as well strive for the most compatibility with 2.5... >>> >>> Sure, it won't be a problem on Jython 3.0. But I'm doing this for the >>> upcoming Jython 2.5, where we still have to live with __cmp__ >> >> Which is why I recommend the closest possible compatibility. :-) > > Oh, right :) > > But that's going to be easier if I understand the "why" and not only > the "how". I can live with a "no idea why" answer, though. Close -- I would have to do a lot of thinking, swapping in parts of my memory that have been gone for years. I say, follow CPython blindly and you can't go too wrong: even if the rules are arbitrary, they are what everyone expects. -- --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