<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Guido van Rossum <<a href="mailto:guido@python.org">guido@python.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Benjamin Peterson<br>
<<a href="mailto:musiccomposition@gmail.com">musiccomposition@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Guido van Rossum <<a href="mailto:guido@python.org">guido@python.org</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">> > > PyString -> PyBytes ...<br>
> ><br>
> > -1. This will make merging code from 2.6 harder, and causes more work<br>
> > for porting C extensions.<br>
<br>
> There was a thread about this a few weeks ago:<br>
> <a href="http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077339.html" target="_blank">http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077339.html</a><br>
> We can still do the renaming, but alias PyString to PyBytes.<br>
<br>
</div>That's a rather long thread. Was any conclusion reached? I'm not sure<br>
how introducing a set of aliases will help merging 2.6 code to 3.0.<br>
Can you or Christian describe the proposed approach in more detail?</blockquote><div>As far as I can see, no objections were raised in that thread.<br>Christian explained the probable approach:<br><a href="http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077362.html">http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077362.html</a><br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">--Guido van Rossum (home page: <a href="http://www.python.org/%7Eguido/" target="_blank">http://www.python.org/~guido/</a>)<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>