On 4/17/07, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps a rewrite could target 3.0 and 2.6 could use a backported
version of this *if* py3k compatibility mode is enabled? I'd love to
see at least the 3.0 version cleaned up.
A lot of these bugs can be fixed without forking. I've been
Great -- if you target 2.6, it'll automatically be merged into 3.0 the
next time somebody runs svnmerge. (Thomas?)
--Guido
On 4/18/07, Jason Orendorff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/17/07, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps a rewrite could target 3.0 and 2.6 could use a
I'm working on minidom's DOM Level 1 compliance, targeting Python 2.6.
We have some bugs involving DOM property behavior. For example,
setting the nodeValue attribute of an Element is supposed to have no
effect. We don't implement this.
The right way to implement these quirks is using new-style
On 4/17/07, Jason Orendorff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Surely nobody is subclassing these classes. You don't subclass DOM
interfaces--the DOM doesn't work that way. So this change should be
OK. Right?
People are definitely subclassing those classes:
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 22:37, Jason Orendorff wrote:
The right way to implement these quirks is using new-style classes and
properties. Right now minidom uses old-style classes and lots of
hackery, and it's pretty broken. (Another example--there is an
Attr._set_prefix method, but it is
Perhaps a rewrite could target 3.0 and 2.6 could use a backported
version of this *if* py3k compatibility mode is enabled? I'd love to
see at least the 3.0 version cleaned up.
--Guido
On 4/17/07, Fred L. Drake, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 22:37, Jason Orendorff wrote:
