Bugs in CPython 3.1.1 [wave.py]

[Steve Holden]

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> * Steven D'Aprano:
>>
>> Nobody is trying to understate the complexity of writing a large
>> application that supports both 2.6 and 3.x, or of taking an existing
>> library written for 2.5 and upgrading it to support 3.1. But the
>> magnitude of these tasks is no greater (and potentially smaller) than
>> supporting (say) 2.3 through 2.5. To describe it as "hopeless" is
>> simply mistaken and weakens your credibility.
> 
> It seems that people here put a lot of meaning into "hopeless"...
> 
Because they are programmers, so they tend to read your meaning quite
literally. Would you have them do anything else?

> Would it be better to say that it's "hard" or "very hard" or
> "impractical for the novice"?
> 
What would a novice want with writing portable code anyway?

> After all, the bug that this thread is about demonstrated that unit
> tests designed for 2.x do not necessarily uncover 3.x incompatibilities.
> 
> Even at the level of Python's own standard library.
> 
> But, regarding reformulations that don't imply untrue things to anyone
> (or nearly), I'd like the text on that page to still fit on one page. :-)
> 
Modulo the smiley, what on earth is supposed to be funny about the way
you waste people's time with trips down semantic ratholes?

You say something is "hopeless", which can generally be taken to mean
that nobody should even bother to try doing it, and then retreat into
argument when a counter-example is provided.

Just for once, could you consider admitting you might have been wrong?

regards
 Steve
-- 
Steve Holden           +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010  http://us.pycon.org/
Holden Web LLC                 http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS:        http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/