Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 469: Restoring the iterkeys/values/items() methods

On 19 Apr 2014 12:29, "Ezio Melotti" <ezio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Steven D'Aprano <ste...@pearwood.info>
wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 11:41:35AM +0000, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:> >> It is a signigificant portion of the incompatibility, and seems like> >> such a minor concession to compatibility to make.> >> > I don't think it is a significant portion of incompatibility. Or at> > least, I think that the Twisted folks (or Nick, if he wants to speak for> > them) have to justify why it's significant.> >>> Assuming this gets included in 3.5 (which will be released around the> end of 2015), are they planning to disregard all the previous 3.x> releases and then wait a couple more years (so 2018+) for 3.5 to> become common?> Are they going to support 3.3+ only (with u'...') and have extra cruft> for 3.3/3.4 to deal with the missing iter* methods and then remove the> cruft once 3.5 is the oldest 3.x release that is supported?> What happens if this addition will still not push people to move their> code to 3.x and similar requests are made for 3.6+ (and shift what I> just said for another 18 months)?

This isn't really about porting major libraries or frameworks (except
perhaps Twisted, which was already blocked by the binary interpolation
issue anyway), but about chipping away at the barriers to migration for the
large custom in-house code bases, and the wide array of Python
*applications* that are part of the reason that people pay companies like
Red Hat to provide long term support.

Cheers,
Nick.

>> Best Regards,> Ezio Melotti>> >> >> > --> > Steven> _______________________________________________> Python-Dev mailing list> Pyth...@python.org> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev> Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ncoghlan%40gmail.com