Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Greg Ewing > <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: >> Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >>> I'll gladly take that as an added rationalization of my plea not to >>> change datetime. >> In the case of datetime, could perhaps just the >> module name be changed so that it's not the same >> as a name inside the module? Maybe call it >> date_time or date_and_time. > > I don't think that's advisable ATM -- again, something we should have > done for 3.0, but now it's too late. > > I really don't want to set a trend where 3.1 is backwards incompatible > with 3.0 *except* in cases where we were really planning to kill > something in 3.0 and accidentally forgot to quite remove it completely > (like cmp()). > Right. Otherwise pprint.pprint becomes pprint.p_print and ...
That way madness lies. Besides which, what a terrific opportunity to castigate the Py3k developers forever. Opportunities like that don't come by every day ;-) regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ Want to know? Come to PyCon - soon! http://us.pycon.org/ _______________________________________________ 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
