On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, engelbert gruber wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:50 PM, engelbert gruber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I see mostly ``dict.has_key() not supported in 3.x;`` and sometimes
``DeprecationWarning: cal
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:50 PM, engelbert gruber
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I see mostly ``dict.has_key() not supported in 3.x;`` and sometimes
>> ``DeprecationWarning: callable() not supported in 3.x;`` .
>
> Go
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:50 PM, engelbert gruber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see mostly ``dict.has_key() not supported in 3.x;`` and sometimes
> ``DeprecationWarning: callable() not supported in 3.x;`` .
Good catch, Engelbert.
But why would has_key() need a warning when 2to3 will fix it just
I see mostly ``dict.has_key() not supported in 3.x;`` and sometimes
``DeprecationWarning: callable() not supported in 3.x;`` .
and if someone with commit rights would take i would volunteer to
fix these two on case by case basis, even if it is not my case.
all the best
___
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I wonder if it might not be simpler (at least in some cases) to just
>>> disable the warnings for cer
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wonder if it might not be simpler (at least in some cases) to just
disable the warnings for certain modules? I imagine in many cases
fixing up the 2.6 code to suppress -3 warnings would be
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wonder if it might not be simpler (at least in some cases) to just
> disable the warnings for certain modules? I imagine in many cases
> fixing up the 2.6 code to suppress -3 warnings would be mere busywork
> -- e.g
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, we should eat our own dog food and transition the code over. If
> anything it will help with code maintenance between 2.x and 3.x.
Agreed. It would be annoying to users trying to clear their own code
of -3 warnings if t
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
Some effort needs to be
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Some effort needs to be made to clear the standard library of -3
>>> warnings.
>>> Running -3 on productio
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Yes, indeed. We should make sure, however, that the changes in the 2.6
libraries are the absolute minimum to get the job done. (I'm trying to
pretend like this isn't violat
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>
>> Yes, indeed. We should make sure, however, that the changes in the 2.6
>> libraries are the absolute minimum to get the job done. (I'm trying to
>> pretend like this isn't violating the prohibi
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some effort needs to be made to clear the standard library of -3 warnings.
Running -3 on production code usually involves exercising library code so
the useful result is obscured by Python com
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some effort needs to be made to clear the standard library of -3 warnings.
> Running -3 on production code usually involves exercising library code so
> the useful result is obscured by Python complaining about itself.
Some effort needs to be made to clear the standard library of -3 warnings. Running -3 on production code usually involves
exercising library code so the useful result is obscured by Python complaining about itself. Since that use case involves the users
own tests, I don't think the effort needs
15 matches
Mail list logo
