RetroSearch Browse

Wed Dec 18 01:17:39 CET 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-December/130785.html

Isn't changing it in 2.7.6 which is already released and then reverting in 2.7.7 worse? Either way 2.7.6 will have this change and be in the wild and broken for people who depend on it

> On Dec 17, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote:
> 
> 2013/12/17 Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>:
>> On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:18:25 -0500
>> Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> 
>>> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in
>>> a late-in-the-release-cycle third dot release?  It caused, ZODB's tests
>>> to fail, for instance.
>> 
>> Given the change doesn't seem to bring any visible change for users
>> (either performance or robustness), I think it would be safe to revert
>> it *in 2.7*.
> 
> I agree with Antoine. It's better not to break even morally-broken
> programs like the zope tests in 2.7.x if it doesn't win anything.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Benjamin
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/donald%40stufft.io

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-December/130785.html below:

[Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6