[stdlib-sig] standardizing the deprecation policy (and how noisy they are)

Yuvgoog Greenle ubershmekel at gmail.com
Tue Nov 10 00:09:25 CET 2009

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python at benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> writes:
>> We cannot expect all developers to release a new version just before
>> or the day of a new interpreter release. This is what separates
>> interpreted languages from compiled ones; just because you upgrade
>> your compiler does not mean new warnings will suddenly show up for the
>> compiled languages.
> This is the most convincing point I see in favour of disabling
> DeprecationWarning by default. Thanks for clearly stating why it applies
> only to language interpreter implementations.

Sorry Benny but you were convinced by an invalid argument.

This move won't save developers from releasing "a new version just
before or the day of a new interpreter release" because things are
bound to be deprecated. Developers will have to work extra hard when
they find out their app just breaks completely on a sunny interpreter
release. No pesky warnings - just plain old traceback and a dead

Though I do agree with Brett on agreeing to disagree,


More information about the stdlib-sig mailing list