Neil Toronto wrote:
> Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I have finally completed a draft of a PEP on rebinding of names
>> in outer scopes. I've tried to go back and gather all of the
>> (amazingly numerous) proposals -- if i've forgotten or misattributed
>> any, let me know and i'll be happy to correct them.
>>
>> I look forward to your thoughts on it:
>
> Is there any particular reason this *must* be a Py3k PEP? (Aside from
> the fact that we're discussing it on the Py3k list, of course.) Some of
> the solutions discussed for historical context would *definitely* be bad
> ideas for a 2.x (as would changing the semantics of 'global'), but I
> can't see why the solution proposed in the PEP couldn't be done sooner.
I think you answered your own question - some of the options up for
consideration in the PEP are *not* compatible with 2.x, so targeting Py3k
makes for a freer discussion of the possibilities.
If the result turns out to be backwards compatible, then we can retarget
Python 2.6, but that's actually the case for *all* of the Py3k PEPs (even the
backwards incompatible PEPs will likely have elements which can be
incorporated into the 2.x series to ease the eventual transition).
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
