Hagen Fürstenau wrote: >> I actually almost asked for that to be changed to a >> PendingDeprecationWarning when it was first added - Benjamin, do you >> mind if I downgrade this warning to a pending one post rc2? > > I'm not sure what that would buy us. For the use case I mentioned it > would be just as annoying to get a PendingDeprecationWarning. But if the > warning was completely removed now, nested could still get deprecated in > 3.2 as soon as some better mechanism for a variable number of managers > has been provided. Unlike a full DeprecationWarning, a PendingDeprecationWarning is ignored by default. You have to switch them on explicitly via code or a command line switch in order to see them. Pending warnings give the hint that we intend to get rid of something, but either don't have clear replacements for some legitimate use cases (as in the case of contextlib.nested) or have some other reason for not generating a warning by default (e.g. we may not have cleared all uses out of the standard library yet). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------
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