On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Sebastian Haase <seb.ha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> (Is the problem here that people think that the -Q option should be >> used for anything other than 3.X compatibility testing? Writing code >> for 2.X that depends on -Qnew is not the right thing do to; please use >> the "from __future__ import division" module-level pragma instead.) >> > (referring to the last paragraph:) > You are probably correct. ((Except using '//' does not *depend* on > -Qnew -- the '//' operator works the same with and without -Q)) > However, we use python mostly in an interactive mode - essentially as > a Matlab substitute.
Oh, sorry, I completely misread your first post - didn't notice that you mention that you *always* did this. I'm too old school to like breaking things just for the sake of it (and I know people who still use PIL with 1.5.2 and 2.1 in long-running production systems), so I thought you wanted this more of a "let's get ready for 3.X" reason (or perhaps even the "oh shiny new core feature must use it" attitude that's quite common in Python land these days ;-) than anything else. But I think I'll have to leave this as is in 1.1.7 (which should go RC later today or tomorrow), but at least I now understand the rationale for changing it also when targeting 2.X. (having a benefit != 0 definitely helps when you're doing cost/benefit analysis :-) Thanks /F _______________________________________________ Image-SIG maillist - Image-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig