[GvR]
>. After
> all we already have lots of places where Python 2.x supports an old
> and a new way (e.g. string exceptions up to 2.5, classic classes, old
> and rich comparisons).

I thought the whole point of 3.0 was a recognition that all that 
doubling-up was a bad thing and to be rid of it.  Why make the
situation worse?  ISTM that we need two versions of oct() like
we need a hole in the head.  Heck, there's potentially a case to be
made that we don't need oct() at all.  IIRC, unix permissions like
0666 were the only use case that surfaced.

Also, I thought that the only reason you allowed b'' to be an alias for ''
in 2.6 was that it was the only way 2-to-3 converter would work.
That same rationale doesn't seem to apply here. I don't really see
why the necessity of b'' should be seen as opening the flood gates
to backport everything without regard to whether it makes Py2.6 better.


Raymond
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to