On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:48 PM Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 6 May 2019 19:39:39 +0300 > Serge Matveenko <s...@matveenko.ru> wrote:
> > With all respect, I disagree. There are ways to evolve Python such as > > deprecation policies which proven to be effective. There are ways to > > monitor current features adoption on PyPI to see whether it is safe to > > remove deprecated things. > > The main constructors for built-in types are used so pervasively that > there is no hope of actually removing such deprecated behavior. I have no intention to start a long hypothetical discussion here, really. There are a lot of things which were broken at some point even despite 2to3 crusade. Not to count: `except` syntax, restriction of `async` keyword, u-strings forth and back. Usually, It doesn't matter much why one cannot upgrade the interpreter to the next version. Often, It just stops working and forces a user to dig into dependencies mess. I agree that there is no hope in making a change when there is no intention to make this change. If this change is needed there are ways to achieve that. The path could be almost infinite but it surely cannot be walked if nobody willing to take it. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
