On Sep 10, 2005, at 6:07 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > I had that in mind when I wrote my post; changing types is not the > way, that will not work. That is why I proposed __future__ (I really > do not know very well the implementation details of that feature) > because I think the parser/compiler can (magically) make the > replacements, e.g. dict.items -> dict.iteritems for Py2.X series in > codes *using* dicts . Do you think something like this could be > implemented in a safer way? >
No, that cannot work. However, there is a very obvious and trivial solution. Do not remove dict.iteritems in Py 3.0. Py2.X programs wishing forward compat can avoid dict.items and use instead dict.iteritems. In Py3.0, dict.items becomes a synonym for dict.iteritems and programs that don't care about compat with 2.X can just use dict.items from then on. And everybody can be happy. A small number of redundant methods is a small price to pay for compatibility. James _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
