On 22Mar2019 1101, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 10:37 AM Inada Naoki <songofaca...@gmail.com
<mailto:songofaca...@gmail.com>> wrote:
There might be some small troubles. But it was small enough for
Python minor versions, I think.
I don't think it's worth the cost to users. We can just choose to stop
using it in the stdlib and not use PendingDeprecationWarning. And if
people want to force others to define their own
PendingDeprecationWarning by deprecating that's fine, but the aliasing
where it could cause unintended exception swallowing for something
related to breaking changes seems unnecessarily risky to me simply
because we don't want to ask users to update their code in a
backwards-compatible fashion.
What does it mean to put DeprecationWarning on PendingDeprecationWarning
and then alias PendingDeprecationWarning to DeprecationWarning?
"If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea." :)
(FWIW, agree with Brett. We can simply stop using it ourselves without
breaking anyone. Of all the things in the stdlib that are hard to
maintain, this is nowhere near the top of the list.)
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
