On 3/28/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like your strawman: if incompatibilities or synergy
> don't require it to go into Py3k, let's propose it for 2.x.

Yeah, I think this makes a lot of sense - and we should probably
document it somewhere.  Do you want this in the Backwards-Incompatible
Changes PEP?  Or another PEP?  Or maybe just an update to PEP 1?

Steve
--
Grammar am for people who can't think for myself.
        --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to