On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:48 PM, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: > At 05:22 PM 6/18/2010 +0000, l...@rmi.net wrote: >> >> So here it is: The prevailing view is that 3.X developers hoisted things >> on users that they did not fully work through themselves. Unicode is >> prime among these: for all the talk here about how 2.X was broken in >> this regard, the implications of the 3.X string solution remain to be >> fully resolved in the 3.X standard library to this day. What is a >> common Python user to make of that? > > Certainly, this was my impression as well, after all the Web-SIG discussions > regarding the state of the stdlib in 3.x with respect to URL parsing, > joining, opening, etc.
Nothing is set in stone; if something is incredibly painful, or worse yet broken, then someone needs to file a bug, bring it to this list, or bring up a patch. This is code we're talking about - nothing is set in stone, and if something is criminally broken it needs to be first identified, and then fixed. > To be honest, I'm waiting to see some sort of tutorial(s) for using 3.x that > actually addresses these kinds of stdlib usage issues, so that I don't have > to think about it or futz around with experimenting, possibly to find that > some things can't be done at all. I guess tutorial welcome, rather than patch welcome then ;) > IOW, 3.x has broken TOOOWTDI for me in some areas. There may be obvious > ways to do it, but, as per the Zen of Python, "that way may not be obvious > at first unless you're Dutch". ;-) What areas. We need specifics which can either be: 1> Shot down. 2> Turned into bugs, so they can be fixed 3> Documented in the core documentation. jesse _______________________________________________ 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
