[Image-SIG] Will 1.1.7 be true-division safe ?

Fredrik Lundh fredrik at pythonware.com
Sun May 31 15:32:16 CEST 2009

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Sebastian Haase <seb.haase at gmail.com> wrote:
>> (Is the problem here that people think that the -Q option should be
>> used for anything other than 3.X compatibility testing?  Writing code
>> for 2.X that depends on -Qnew is not the right thing do to; please use
>> the "from __future__ import division" module-level pragma instead.)
> (referring to the last paragraph:)
> You are probably correct.   ((Except using '//' does not *depend* on
> -Qnew -- the '//' operator works the same with and without -Q))
> However, we use python mostly in an interactive mode - essentially as
> a Matlab substitute.

Oh, sorry, I completely misread your first post - didn't notice that
you mention that you *always* did this.  I'm too old school to like
breaking things just for the sake of it (and I know people who still
use PIL with 1.5.2 and 2.1 in long-running production systems), so I
thought you wanted this more of a "let's get ready for 3.X" reason (or
perhaps even the "oh shiny new core feature must use it" attitude
that's quite common in Python land these days ;-) than anything else.

But I think I'll have to leave this as is in 1.1.7 (which should go RC
later today or tomorrow), but at least I now understand the rationale
for changing it also when targeting 2.X.  (having a benefit != 0
definitely helps when you're doing cost/benefit analysis :-)

Thanks /F

More information about the Image-SIG mailing list