How to break? (was Re: A modest PEP0238 suggestion)
Aahz Maruch
aahz at panix.com
Sat Jul 28 11:53:55 EDT 2001
In article <9jjk9g$8tk$1 at newsy.ifm.liu.se>,
Paul Svensson <paul at svensson.org> wrote:
>
>The only choices that make sense to me here are, either we break stuff,
>or we do nothing. Either way, we'll most likely have to revisit the
>issue if/when syntax for rationals is to be added to the language.
Well, no. I think that there's now a fairly widespread agreement that
what we've got now is broken. The question is, how do we switch to a
future such that new code isn't broken, while breaking as little old
code as possible?
Whoops! Actually, that's the wrong question. The *real* question is,
how do we break old code in a way that makes it least-painful to fix?
Phrased that way, I think it *has* to be true that there is never a
future in which old code can break silently.
--
--- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2001 by aahz at pobox.com)
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista
Fortune cookie: Watch your relations with other people carefully, be reserved.
More information about the Python-list
mailing list