> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 15:55, Florent Xicluna <florent.xicluna at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to open a discussion on the meaning of deprecation warnings in 2.7. > I assume, but I may be wrong, that 2.7 will be the last version in the 2.x > branch. With this assumption, we should not find many things deprecated in 2.7 > final. > > On the other hand, the list of py3k deprecation warnings is increasing a lot. > And more users will probably start to move from 2.7 to the 3.1 release. > > While working on ticket #7092 and #7849, we started to discuss some proposals > to simplify the deprecation warnings for 2.7. > > We discussed these 2 proposals: > > 1) in 2.6 there's no distinction between py3k and normal deprecations: they > share the same category, DeprecationWarning. The "-3" switch enables the > py3k DeprecationWarning and SyntaxWarning. > Do we need to introduce a subclass Py3kDeprecationWarning in 2.7? It will > make it easier to separate both kinds of deprecations (2.x and 3.x), and > to filter them. > > 2) a different idea is to deprecate the "-3" switch and consider all py3k > deprecations as normal deprecations. -1 for several reasons. 1) We've advertised -3 as part of TheOneTrueWay(tm). It's a core part of our transition story, so we should keep that as clean/consistent as possible. Deprecating the -3 switch seems like shooting ourselves in the foot. 2) There is some chance that there will be a 2.8, so it isn't helpful to burn down our bridges. ISTM, nothing is currently broken and in need of "fixing" in 2.7. I don't see any advantage to conflating py3k warnings with other deprecations. Raymond -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100302/98db9096/attachment.html>
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