On 29/05/10 22:46, Jesse Noller wrote: > On May 28, 2010, at 11:31 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: >> Since this topic keeps coming up, some reasoning along these lines >> should go into PEP 3148. > > I'll type something up this weekend and shoot it to Brian for inclusion. > I was hoping to be able to keep it out of the futures pep itself, but it > seems that won't work :) Well, punting on whether or not we actually *do* part 2 is still fine. As Eric pointed out, there are issues with unpickling that make the wisdom of following through with renaming any existing modules fairly questionable. 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