On 3/21/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/21/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/20/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [snip] > > > Or we could just have 2.6 warn about the presence (or use) of __cmp__ > > > -- users can write equivalent code using __lt__ etc. themselves and > > > probably do a better job. > > > > Fair enough. > > > > Is anyone collecting a list of these --py3k warnings? There seem to be > > a lot recent changes that 2.6's py3k-compat mode will be handling, but > > I haven't seen anything about someone tracking them/working on a PEP > > on the issue. Or did I just volunteer myself for that? : ) > > Neal and I have been updating PEP361, and I will be keeping an eye on it > when I refactor the p3yk branch into separate py3k-feature-branches (be it > bazaar or mercurial or whatever.) Each conceptual change in py3k will be a > separate branch, so keeping track of what needs to be warned will be easier. > (But the practical consequences of this will be clearer after I give it some > concrete form :)
Good to know. Thanks, Thomas! Collin Winter _______________________________________________ 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
