[Python-ideas] Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes

Jesse Noller jnoller at gmail.com
Thu Oct 22 02:23:52 CEST 2009

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>> Guido van Rossum <guido at ...> writes:
>>> Note, the moratorium would only cover the language itself plus
>>> built-in functions, not the standard library.
>> Out of curiousity, would it preclude adding e.g. a method to a built-in type?
>> (I'm not saying this with anything specific in mind)
> And I can't answer without anything specific in front of me.
> I think it's time for someone to draft a PEP for me summarizing some
> of the points of this discussion.
> Some specific quick responses before I run off to do real work:
> - no, I don't think it should have been announced before 3.1 was frozen
> - no, I don't think we need an ISO standard
> - no, it's not decided yet
> - no, it's not an absolute law (actually typical laws have lots of
> gray areas too)

I'll volunteer to write it up; I like writing. I'll send it to
python-dev when it's ready.


More information about the Python-ideas mailing list