On 3/21/07, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "BJörn Lindqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > | No comments at all. :( Did I send the mail to the wrong list? > > No, perhaps everyone did as I did, and assumed someone else would answer > ;-)
I see.. Thanks for your response then. :) > | Either or, I still would like to know what the py3k rules are for > | repairing broken API:s. > > I don't remember there being much discussion of this yet. I believe there > is agreement to change names of modules to comform with PEP 8, but I > suspect this a easier to accomodate in the autofixer than names within > modules. It is easy to do it manually too, if it is allowed. But the problem becomes what to do for Python 2.6? > My personal position, at least for threading and telnet, would be change > away, since I have never used either and would not be affected. But I know > others are in the opposite position, so I would not give mine much weight. > > It also seems to me that module fixups might better wait until the kernal > and fixup code are more stable. I disagree. Most modules in the Standard Library needs a makeover which potentially is more disruptive than other changes. It is not so hard to adapt to print being a function instead of a statement. It is hard to adapt to 500 different backwards-incompatible API changes in the Standard Library. IMHO, codified guidelines for how to handle that would be most useful. I also think that that could bring many bugs and patches on sourceforge to closure because they require incompatible API changes (such as the telnetlib example). -- mvh Björn _______________________________________________ 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
