On 28/05/2008, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm beginning to wonder whether I'm the only one who cares about > the Python 2.x branch not getting cluttered up with artifacts caused > by a broken forward merge strategy.
I care, but I struggle to understand the implications and/or what is being proposed in many cases. Recent examples are the ABC backports and the current thread (string C API). I simply don't follow the issues well enough to comment. > How can it be that we allow major C API changes such as the renaming > of the PyString APIs to go into the trunk without discussion or > a PEP ? Christian has raised this a couple of times, but there has been little discussion. I suspect that this is because there is not enough clarity over the practical consequences. A PEP may help here, but I'm not sure how much - it could spark discussion, but would anyone actually end up any better informed? > We're having lengthy discussions about the addition of single method > to an object, but such major changes just go in like that and nobody > seems to really care. I suspect deadline pressure and burnout are involved here. In all honesty, there's been little or no work done on the C API, which is just as much in need of review and possible cleanup for 3.0 as the language. It's as close as makes no difference to too late now - does that mean we've lost the chance? Paul. _______________________________________________ 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
