On 5/29/06, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think we should do as Thomas proposes: plan to make it an error in > > 2.6 (or 2.7 if there's a big outcry, which I don't expect) and accept > > it with a warning in 2.5. > > That's what I arrived at, although 2.4.3's checking behavior is > actually so inconsistent that "it" needs some defining (what exactly > are we trying to still accept? e.g., that -1 doesn't trigger "I" > complaints but that -1L does above? that one's surely a bug).
No, it reflects that (up to 2.3 I believe) 0xffffffff was -1 but 0xffffffffL was 4294967295L. > To be > clear, Thomas proposed "accepting it" (whatever that means) until 3.0. Fine with me. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
