RetroSearch Browse

Tue Feb 28 21:27:34 CET 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/117090.html

Here's what I know:

We don't add features to bug-fix releases.
u'' is considered a feature.
By not backporting to 3.1 and 3.2 we are not easing the migration pains 
from 2.x.

Here's what I don't know:

Why is readding u'' a feature and not a bug?  (Just had a thought about 
this -- because the removal of u'' is documented.)

To take a different example: callable() had been removed from 3.0, and 
was added back in 3.2.  callable() is not a big deal as you can roll 
your own quite easily -- and that is the huge difference: a user 
*cannot* add u'' back to 3.0/3.1 (at least, not without modifying and 
rebuilding the Python interpreter source).

If there is already a FAQ entry feel free to point me to it, but I would 
still be curious why, in this instance, practicality does not beat purity?

My apologies if this type of question has been rehashed before.

~Ethan~

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/117090.html below:

[Python-Dev] Backporting PEP 414