In <mailman.1795.1265135424.28905.python-l...@python.org> Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> writes:
>On 2/2/2010 9:13 AM, kj wrote: >>> As for fixing it, unfortunately it's not quite so simple to fix without >>> breaking backwards-compatibility. The opportunity to do so for Python 3.0 >>> was missed. >> >> This last point is to me the most befuddling of all. Does anyone >> know why this opportunity was missed for 3.0? Anyone out there >> with the inside scoop on this? Was the fixing of this problem >> discussed in some PEP or some mailing list thread? (I've tried >> Googling this but did not hit on the right keywords to bring up >> the deliberations I'm looking for.) >There was a proposal to put the whole stdlib into a gigantic package, so >that >import itertools >would become, for instance >import std.itertools. >Guido rejected that. I believe he both did not like it and was concerned >about making upgrade to 3.x even harder. The discussion was probably on >the now closed py3k list. Thanks. I'll look for this thread. ~K -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
