RetroSearch Browse

Tue Nov 3 21:23:38 CET 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-November/093667.html

James Y Knight wrote:

> If that happens, it's not true that there's *nowhere* to go. A solution 
> would be to discard 3.x as a failed experiment, take everything that is 
> useful from it and port it to 2.x, and simply continue development from 
> the last 2.x release. And from there, features can be deprecated and 
> then removed a few releases later, as is the usual policy.

The once 'usual policy' of removal was changed several years ago to 
'defer removals until 3.0' because people wanted a more stable language 
and claimed that they would prefer to deal with several removals all at 
once. So old-style classes were kept around long past when they would 
have been removed under the old 'usual policy'. Ditto for old-style int 
/ int and some others.  Or one can simply recognize that 3.0 was the 
'few releases later' release of that policy.

The other big change was switching to unicode strings from ascii strings 
with optional unicode string add-on. That was/is/will-be a hassle 
regardless of when and what name, but necessary for Python to be a 
modern world language.

tjr

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-November/093667.html below:

[Python-Dev] 2.7 Release? 2.7 == last of the 2.x line?