On Oct 3, 2017 01:00, "Guido van Rossum" <[email protected]> wrote:

 Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Koos Zevenhoven <[email protected]> wrote

I don't mind this (or Nathaniel ;-) being academic. The backwards
> incompatibility issue I've just described applies to any extension via
> composition, if the underlying type/protocol grows new members (like the CM
> protocol would have gained __suspend__ and __resume__ in PEP521).
>

Since you seem to have a good grasp on this issue, does PEP 550 suffer from
the same problem? (Or PEP 555, for that matter? :-)



Neither has this particular issue, because they don't extend an existing
protocol. If this thread has any significance, it will most likely be
elsewhere.

-- Koos (mobile)


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to