On 4/18/2014 10:31 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
After spending some time talking to the folks at the PyCon Twisted sprints, they persuaded me that adding back the iterkeys/values/items methods for mapping objects would be a nice way to eliminate a key porting hassle for them (and likely others), without significantly increasing the complexity of Python 3.
I hate this idea. It strikes me as junking up Python3 with stuff it is well rid of. I think anything that can be left to the transition modules should be. The u'' syntax had to be in the language itself. This does not have to be.
I personally put this one in the same category as PEP 414 -
When I suggested that PEP 414 might be seen as a precedent for restoring more of Py2, I was trashed for saying so. "No, no, u'' is a unique case. [it is] This will be the last proposal like this." What will come next?
> not
particularly useful from a Python 3 perspective, but not really harmful either,
It makes the language a bit harder to learn and remember and slightly more confusing.
It will not help inter-operating with Python before 3.5, at the earliest and cannot be backported. Most things in an independent module can be used with any 3.x.
I would have preferred that you started by presenting the problem on python-ideas with possible solutions, rather than as a finished PEP pushing my least favorite solution.
-- Terry Jan Reedy _______________________________________________ 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
