Ben Finney wrote:
> Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Sridhar Ratnakumar
>> <sridharr at activestate.com> wrote:
>>> Also, "Requires-Python: 3" would include all 3.X versions, correct?
>> Correct, because, "Requires-Python: 3" is equivalent to
>> "Requires-Python: ~= 3" which is equivalent to "Requires-Python:
>> 3.x.x"
>
> This is totally counter to conventional comparisons, and is an excellent
> example of why the equivalence of ‘3’ to ‘>=3, <4’ is a bad idea.
>
> Instead, the default should be ‘==’. That is, ‘Requires-Python: 3’
> should be equivalent to ‘Requires-Python: ==3’; and only “3” or “3.0” or
> “3.0.0” etc. will match. I maintain that is what most people will expect
> on seeing that syntax.
>
> If a less strict range is desired, the existing comparison operators
> ‘>’, ‘>=’, ‘<’, ‘<=’ are sufficient, more obvious, and more explicit. In
> other words, to get the meaning you desire above, the existing operators
> can be used: ‘Requires-Python: >=3, <4’.
>
Perhaps there should be a new range operator:
Requires-Python: 3 ~ 4
Half-open, of course.
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