Well said Antoine. --Guido van Rossum (sent from Android phone) On Feb 27, 2012 2:03 PM, "Antoine Pitrou" <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:54:51 -0500 Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
On 2/27/2012 1:17 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I just don't understand the pushback here at all. This is such a nobrainer.
I agree. Just let's start deprecating it too, so that once Python 2.x compatibility is no longer relevant we can eventually stop supporting it (though that may have to wait until Python 4...). We need to send *some* sort of signal that this is a compatibility hack and that no new code should use it. Maybe a SilentDeprecationWarning?
Before we make this change, I would like to know if this is Armin's last proposal to revert Python 3 toward Python 2 or merely the first in a series. I question this because last December Armin wrote
"And in my absolutely personal opinion Python 3.3/3.4 should be more like Python 2* and Python 2.8 should happen and be a bit more like Python 3." * he wrote '3' but obviously means '2'. http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2011/12/7/thoughts-on-python3/
Chris has also made it clear that he (also?) would like more reversions.
Please. While I'm not strongly in favour of the PEP, this kind of argument is dishonest. Whatever Armin's secret wishes may be, his PEP should be judged on its own grounds.
Thank you
Antoine.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org