This is my standpoint. The major releases would remove the code that's been marked as "deprecated". You probably would've know for the past 3 versions anyway...
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 4:08 AM, R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> > wrote: > > (That said, I > > do see some merit to doing some extra cleaning at the 4.0 > > boundary, just for mental convenience.) > > A transition from 3.9 to 4.0 that removes a whole lot of deprecated > aliases and such wouldn't be a bad thing. It's technically breaking > backward compat (and thus justifying the major version bump), but any > code broken by it would have been unidiomatic for the past X versions > anyway. > > ChrisA > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/rymg19%40gmail.com > -- Ryan If anybody ever asks me why I prefer C++ to C, my answer will be simple: "It's becauseslejfp23(@#Q*(E*EIdc-SEGFAULT. Wait, I don't think that was nul-terminated."
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
