On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote: > No, we should eat our own dog food and transition the code over. If > anything it will help with code maintenance between 2.x and 3.x. Agreed. It would be annoying to users trying to clear their own code of -3 warnings if the stdlib emitted warnings they couldn't easily suppress. It should be done with extreme caution though, and preferably on a case-by-case basis rather than in a sweeping pass. Caution should also be taken that the changes aren't merged into 3.0 (where presumably they would conflict with already 3.0-compatible code). I wonder if it might not be simpler (at least in some cases) to just disable the warnings for certain modules? I imagine in many cases fixing up the 2.6 code to suppress -3 warnings would be mere busywork -- e.g. for code that gets deleted in 3.0 altogether. (Hm, in fact for such code there's no need to suppress the -3 warnings, as they serve as a warning to any user of the module that they are using something that won't survive into 3.0.) -- --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