RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 16 03:58:38 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109351.html

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Senthil Kumaran <orsenthil at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:01 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> With RFC 3986 passing its 6th birthday, and with it being well past
>> its 7th by the time 3.3 comes out, can we finally switch to supporting
>> the current semantics rather than the obsolete behaviour?
>
> We do infact, support RFC 3986, expect for the cases where those
> conflict with the previous RFCs. (IOW, backwards compatible).
> The tests can give you a good picture here. Do you mean, we should
> just do away with backwards  compatibility? Or you had anything else
> specifically in mind?

Backwards compatible with *what* though?

For the decimal module, we treat deviations from spec as bug fixes and
update accordingly, even if this changes behaviour.

For URL parsing, the spec has changed (6 years ago!), but we still
don't provide a spec-conformant implementation, even via a flag or new
function.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109351.html below:

[Python-Dev] Finally switch urllib.parse to RFC3986 semantics?