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
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
