On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would agree with leaving it implementation defined - I don't think
>> either PyPy or CPython should be forced to change their current
>> behaviour in relation to this. A minor note in the language reference to
>> that effect may be worthwhile just to make that stance official.
>
> That is just going to cause some programs to have a portability
> surprise. I think one or the other should be fixed. I am fine with
> declaring dict({}, **{1:3}) illegal, since after all it is abuse of
> the ** mechanism. We should deprecate it in at least one version
> though.Okay; I'll open an issue for deprecation in 3.2 and removal in 3.3. Can this sneak in under the 'incorrect language semantics' exemption for PEP 3003 (the moratorium PEP)? If not, then deprecation presumably has to wait for 3.3. Mark _______________________________________________ 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
