[GvR] >. After > all we already have lots of places where Python 2.x supports an old > and a new way (e.g. string exceptions up to 2.5, classic classes, old > and rich comparisons). I thought the whole point of 3.0 was a recognition that all that doubling-up was a bad thing and to be rid of it. Why make the situation worse? ISTM that we need two versions of oct() like we need a hole in the head. Heck, there's potentially a case to be made that we don't need oct() at all. IIRC, unix permissions like 0666 were the only use case that surfaced. Also, I thought that the only reason you allowed b'' to be an alias for '' in 2.6 was that it was the only way 2-to-3 converter would work. That same rationale doesn't seem to apply here. I don't really see why the necessity of b'' should be seen as opening the flood gates to backport everything without regard to whether it makes Py2.6 better. Raymond
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