Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Eric Smith <e...@trueblade.com> wrote:
Mark Dickinson wrote:
What are the current plans for PEP 328 (the absolute imports PEP) in
Python 2.x?
Not sure about the decision one way or the other. But if there's not going
to be a 2.8, and if DeprecationWarnings are off by default anyway, I'm not
sure it makes any sense to add a DeprecationWarning in 2.7. From my quick
testing, -3 doesn't warn about relative imports. Perhaps a better strategy
in this particular case is to make -3 give that warning?
Well, if there's any possibility at all of a Python 2.8 (and it's not
clear to me whether this has been absolutely ruled out) then it's
conceivable that the people producing it might want to make imports
absolute for 2.8, perhaps as part of an effort to minimize 2.x -> 3.x
differences. A DeprecationWarning in 2.7 would help with that.
Certainly the DeprecationWarning couldn't hurt.
On the other hand, it's easy enough to use the 'from __future__
import' in 2.x code.
At any rate, it's clear that there should be a -3 warning. I'll open an issue.
Thanks. I'll look at implementing it (and the DeprecationWarning) at PyCon.
Agreed on all points. Would it be terrible to simply add all relevant
tags the moment a PEP is accepted? E.g., if a PEP pronounces some
particular behaviour deprecated in Python 3.3 and removed in Python
3.4, then corresponding release blockers for 3.3 and 3.4 could be
opened as part of implementing the PEP.
+1.
_______________________________________________
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
