On Fri, 24 May 2019 at 16:49, Batuhan Taskaya <[email protected]> wrote:
> > changing this will probably break code > It is why i'm suggesting making the real transition at 4.0 and adding a > future flag for now. > It is also not reasonable to suppose that "since python 4 is looming in the horizon we can schedule a lot of breaking changes for that". The incompatible changes that took place on 2->3 won't happen again. If the absolute path for __file__ is needed and you can demonstrate it, it is safer to create another property like __abs_file__ (this has happened with __qualname__ for example) > > And so you need to justify *why* you think that's acceptable > I dont know it is acceptable or not, i saw this issue triaged to stage > "patch required". AFAIK it means someone needs to write a patch for this > issue and i wrote. I'm posting it here because i need to know do i have to > write a pep or just give bpo link to __future__ page. > > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:34 PM Brett Cannon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 11:52 AM Batuhan Taskaya <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> The bpo i referenced can explain it better. An example; >>> >>> def foo(): pass >>> assert foo.__code__.co_filename = >>> os.path.abspath(foo.__code__.co_filename) >>> >>> >> Do realize there's a reason that issue has been open for well over five >> years: changing this will probably break code. And so you need to justify >> *why* you think that's acceptable since Python has existed with these >> semantics on code objects for decades as this point. >> > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
