Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wednesday 16 August 2006 06:19, Jim Jewett wrote: >> I just uploaded a series of IDLE patches, but I'm not quite sure how >> to classify them on the feature/bugfix scale now that the last beta is >> out. >> >> >From most to least buggish: >> >> python.org/sf/1540892 -- honor the new quit() behavior. On the other >> hand, it was documented that this didn't work in IDLE, and it is >> *possible* that someone was counting on this. > > This seems like a sensible thing to add. > >> python.org/sf/1540851 -- with is now a blockopener, and should be >> counted as such -- I *think* this one would be safe, but I know that >> changing a parser can be surprising, and I suppose it *could* wait >> until with no longer requires a future statement. > > If this can be done safely, it should be done. Preferably before RC1, so that > we have time to fix any issues it shows up.
I will look at these two. RC1 seems reasonable. >> python.org/sf/1540874 -- broken shortcut keys. On windows, only one >> entry per menu can be reached with the same shortcut letter, so >> advertising others is just an attractive nuisance. I'm not sure that >> other systems wouldn't be able to use the hidden shortcuts. > > Tough call. I guess it depends on the other systems - I will try this on > Linux > at least, and see if it works there. If it's broken everywhere, then changing > it would seem the least offensive choice. I would have been inclined to make the other choice, i.e. 'p' as the hotkey for print, rather than the rarely used "save copy as". >> python.org/sf/1540869 -- GUI fix. The current code puts in a >> separator using a magic number (and has XXX comments about it.) This >> changes the magic number so that the separator is more visible, but >> I'm not sure the old behavior rose to a bug, or that it wasn't >> platform dependent. > > Let's leave this one for 2.6. > >> python.org/sf/1540849 -- except too broad. I wouldn't suggest >> applying this late in the release cycle, except that it seems sort of >> like the memory errors that are still being patched. > > I'd be concerned that this might cause other obscure behaviour changes, and > so > I'd prefer to leave this to 2.6. Yes, 2.6 for these two. -- KBK _______________________________________________ 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
