On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin@python.org> wrote:
2010/7/25 Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de>:
Nick Coghlan, 25.07.2010 08:29:
We knew PEP 380 would be hurt by the moratorium when the moratorium PEP went through.
The goals of the moratorium itself, in making it possible to have a 3.2 release that is fully supported by all of the major Python implementations, still apply, and I believe making an exception for PEP 380 *would* make those goals much harder to achieve.
IMO, it would be worth asking the other implementations if that is the case. It may well be that they are interested in implementing it anyway, so getting it into CPython and the other implementations at the same time may actually be possible. It wouldn't meet the moratorium as such, but it would absolutely comply with its goals.
Speaking from the PyPy perspective, syntax is not really a problem. It, for example, took me ~1 week to more PyPy from 2.5 to 2.7 syntax. A more interesting moratorium for us would be one on tests that are not implementation portable. :)
I thought at the last two pycons, we've all discussed that we should have a system in place for marking tests *and* modules within the stdlib as "will only work on FooPython". I suspect that it's waiting on the shared-stdlib effort, which is waiting on mercurial (and time). jesse