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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-August/135823.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 4000 to explicitly declare we won't be doing a Py3k style compatibility break again?

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 4000 to explicitly declare we won't be doing a Py3k style compatibility break again?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 4000 to explicitly declare we won't be doing a Py3k style compatibility break again?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Aug 16, 2014, at 07:43 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:

>(Don't understand this to mean that we should never deprecate things.
>Deprecations will happen, they are necessary for the evolution of any
>programming language. But they won't ever hurt in the way that Python 3
>hurt.)

It would be useful to explore what causes the most pain in the 2->3
transition?  IMHO, it's not the deprecations or changes such as print ->
print().  It's the bytes/str split - a fundamental change to core and common
data types.  The question then is whether you foresee any similar looming
pervasive change? [*]

-Barry

[*] I was going to add a joke about mandatory static type checking, but
sometimes jokes are blown up into apocalyptic prophesy around here. ;)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 4000 to explicitly declare we won't be doing a Py3k style compatibility break again?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 4000 to explicitly declare we won't be doing a Py3k style compatibility break again?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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