New PEP: The directive statement
tdelaney at avaya.com
Wed Mar 21 01:06:59 CET 2001
There are however, two things against this PEP.
1. It allows for one incompatible language change (directive as keyword can
interfere with binding to name "directive" as the first line of a file).
2. It provides no method for retrieving version information about
(1) may in practice turn out to be a non-issue, but I think for people who
will actually be using this functionality, (2) will be vital.
+61 2 9352 9079
All recipient(s) of this email have permission to forward or reply to this
email, quoting this email in full or in part.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothy Grant [mailto:tjg at exceptionalminds.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 21 March 2001 3:53 AM
> To: python-list at python.org
> Subject: Re: New PEP: The directive statement
> I am not one of the gods of Python, but I'm not Python
> illiterate either.
> When I read PEP 236. I cringed. I understand the value, but the
> solution seemed far from elegant, and in Python, most things
> seem elegant (except for lambda<wink>.
> When I read the below suggestion it made far more sense to me,
> and seemed to be a more elegant solution to the problem.
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:42:34AM +0100, Martin von Loewis wrote:
> > Please have a look at the PEP below. It is intended to replace the
> > __future__ import suggested in PEP 236.
> > Regards,
> > Martin
> > PEP: XXX
> > Title: The directive statement
> > Version: $Revision$
> > Author: Martin v. Löwis
> > Python-Version: 2.1
> > Status: Active
> > Type: Standards Track
> > Created: 20-Mar-2001
> Stand Fast,
> Timothy Grant tjg at exceptionalminds.com
> Red Hat Certified Engineer www.exceptionalminds.com
> Avalon Technology Group, Inc. <>< (503) 246-3630
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Linux, because rebooting is *NOT* normal<<<<<<<<<
> >>>>This machine was last rebooted: 62 days 21:05 hours ago<<
More information about the Python-list