[Python-Dev] Backporting PEP 3127 to trunk

[Guido van Rossum]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote:
> [GvR]
>
> >. After
>  > all we already have lots of places where Python 2.x supports an old
>  > and a new way (e.g. string exceptions up to 2.5, classic classes, old
>  > and rich comparisons).
>
>  I thought the whole point of 3.0 was a recognition that all that
>  doubling-up was a bad thing and to be rid of it.  Why make the
>  situation worse?  ISTM that we need two versions of oct() like
>  we need a hole in the head.

Raymond, I am getting really sick and tired of your strong language
like this. It feels like a personal attack to me, over and over.

You seem to be the only one advocating 2.6 stay lean and mean (except
of course when *you* want something new). I don't want to go over this
discussion again. I've drawn the line at breaking code that works
under 2.5; you need to be satisfied with that.

> Heck, there's potentially a case to be
>  made that we don't need oct() at all.  IIRC, unix permissions like
>  0666 were the only use case that surfaced.
>
>  Also, I thought that the only reason you allowed b'' to be an alias for ''
>  in 2.6 was that it was the only way 2-to-3 converter would work.
>  That same rationale doesn't seem to apply here. I don't really see
>  why the necessity of b'' should be seen as opening the flood gates
>  to backport everything without regard to whether it makes Py2.6 better.

Again with the colorful language. Nobody is opening floodgates.

Enough said or I start using colorful language myself.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)