On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Senthil Kumaran <orsent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:01 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> With RFC 3986 passing its 6th birthday, and with it being well past >> its 7th by the time 3.3 comes out, can we finally switch to supporting >> the current semantics rather than the obsolete behaviour? > > We do infact, support RFC 3986, expect for the cases where those > conflict with the previous RFCs. (IOW, backwards compatible). > The tests can give you a good picture here. Do you mean, we should > just do away with backwards compatibility? Or you had anything else > specifically in mind?
Backwards compatible with *what* though? For the decimal module, we treat deviations from spec as bug fixes and update accordingly, even if this changes behaviour. For URL parsing, the spec has changed (6 years ago!), but we still don't provide a spec-conformant implementation, even via a flag or new function. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
