On 2/11/2011 4:29 AM, Mark Shannon wrote: > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> Now that the issue has been brought up, it can certainly be taken into >> consideration for 3.3. The idea of defining a Py_PORTABLE_API that is >> even more restrictive than PEP 384 (e.g. eliminating lots of old cruft >> that is a legacy of CPython's long history of development when it was >> the *only* viable Python implementation) may also be worth exploring. > > Absolutely. I intend to do just that. I think we should try to have deprecations and removals in the codebase by the first alpha release for maximal testing. GP's asyncore changes inspired this thought, but I would apply it generally. -- Terry Jan Reedy
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