Chris McDonough <chrism <at> plope.com> writes: > > In that context, I don't see much relevance of having no support for u'' > in Python 3.2. >
Well, if 3.2 remains in use for a longish time, then it is relevant, in the broader context, isn't it? We know how conservative Linux distributions can be with their Python releases - although most are still releasing 2.x as their system Python, this could change at some point in the future. Even if it doesn't, there might be a fair user base of people stuck with 3.2 for any number of reasons, and to support them, the change you propose won't help, because some variant of a package will still have to use u() and b(), just for 3.2 support. I'm not arguing against your proposed change itself - just against your point about the relevance of 3.2. Regards, Vinay Sajip _______________________________________________ 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
