"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > 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?
A PEP that proposes that functions be moved in 3.0 can be split into two actions: an addition and deletion. The addition can be moved back to 2.x, but the deletion cannot. Example: move filter() from builtins to functools (or whatever it ends up being called). I think this should be submitted (and possibly approved) as one 3.0 BIC PEP that mentions the possibility of a two-phase implementation. In such a case, the addition to 2.x should not happen unless and until the deletion in 3.0 is approved and accepted. The BIC PEP could discuss generic categories like this. Terry Jan Reedy _______________________________________________ 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
