RetroSearch Browse

Tue Mar 15 23:46:37 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109327.html

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 15:39, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Of course you could have. You could have added a version of your code
> that uses capsules (just as you are probably doing now).

No I'm not.

> Right - and that's why the deprecation period is not about supporting
> multiple versions, but to reduce the need for people to adjust their
> code on a quick notice.

I think we need to adjust PEP 5 then. We can't keep on breaking
backwards compatibility like this. People are already freaked out
about Python 2 to Python 3, and the argument is often used against
Python that it's not a language to be used in enterprise situations
because Python keeps on breaking backwards compatibility. Up until 3.2
that statement was not actually true. Python 2.x was very backwards
compatible. The next time somebody tells me that Python isn't stable
and breaks backwards compatibility all the time, and says that's why
you should use Java, what can I now say? OK, it's just the C-API, but
that excuse isn't going to fly...

//Lennart

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109327.html below:

[Python-Dev] public visibility of python-dev decisions "before it's too late"