Georg Brandl wrote: > Eric Smith schrieb: >> Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> I wonder if, in order to change the behavior of various built-in >>> functions, it wouldn't be easier to be able to write >>> >>> from future_builtins import oct, hex # and who knows what else >> This makes sense to me, especially if we have a 2to3 fixer which removes >> this line. I'll work on implementing future_builtins. > > Will the future map and filter also belong there (and if they are imported > from future_builtins, 2to3 won't put a list() around them)?
I can certainly do the mechanics of adding the new versions of map and filter to future_builtins, if it's seen as desirable. Maybe we could have 2to3 not put list() around map and filter, if there's been an import of future_builtins. I realize that there are pathological cases where 2to3 doesn't know that a usage of map or filter would really be the generator version from future_builtins, as opposed to the actual list-producing builtins. But would it be good enough to take an import of future_builtins as a hint that the author was aware that 2to3 wasn't going to change map and filter? Still an open issue in my mind is adding a -3 warning to oct and hex, and now conceivably map and filter. Would that be going too far? Eric. _______________________________________________ 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