On Nov 8, 2009, at 7:01 PM, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:14:59 am Steven D'Aprano wrote:
At the very least, I believe, any moratorium should have a clear end
date. A clear end date will be a powerful counter to the impression
that Python the language is moribund. It says, this is an
exceptional
pause, not a permanent halt.
Proposal:
No new language features in odd-numbered point releases (3.3,
3.5, ...).
Even-numbered point releases (3.4, 3.6, ...) may include new language
features provided they meet the usual standards for new features.
3.2 is a special case: as an even-numbered release, it would normally
allow new features, but in recognition of the special nature of the
2.x
to 3.1/3.2 migration, no new language features will be allowed.
Advantages:
* It slows down changes to the language while still allowing
sufficiently high-standard new features.
* Alternate implementations have a stable language version to aim
for.
Assuming point releases come ever 12-18 months, that stable language
version will last 2-3 years.
* It doesn't have the psychological baggage of an unconditional ban
on
new features for the indefinite future. It gives a fixed, known
schedule for when new features will be permitted, without the
uncertainty of "at the BDFL's pleasure".
--
Steven D'Aprano
FWIW, I view a definite end point as a definite plus.
Geremy Condra
There is a time outlined in the pep.
_______________________________________________
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
