On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Michael Urman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So we should add this to 2to3, no? They're going to run that anyway. > > If 2to3 can handle this, that removes the larger half of my objection. > I was under the impression that this kind of semantic inferencing was > beyond its capabilities. But even if so, maybe it's safe to assume > that those names aren't used in other contexts.
2to3 can indeed handle this, but I'm not sure I would want it run automatically (rather have it be opt-in, the way several other fixers are). Solid test suites are critical to the transition process, and changing method names around may upset that. It's unlikely, sure, but it may add to general unease. The way I'd see such a fixer working is that people would run it over their 2.x codebase, commit that change, then transition the rest of their code at release-time, without having to worry about gratuitous code changes in their test suite. Collin Winter _______________________________________________ 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
