On 22 Jun, 12:41, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think it's great that we're going to get Python 3.0 soon, and that > Python 4.0 proposals will benefit from a long period of familiarity > with widely-deployed PyPy :-)
I'm not going to name and shame anyone, but here's part of a genuine docstring from a program I downloaded not so long ago: It was tested for python 4.0. It certainly doesn't work for python versions earlier than 3.3. If I need to speculate about future Python versions, I know who to ask. ;-) Paul P.S. I agree with the sentiment that the annotations feature of Python 3000 seems like a lot of baggage. Aside from some benefits around writing C/C++/Java wrappers, it's the lowest common denominator type annotation dialect that dare not be known as such, resulting from a lack of consensus about what such a dialect should really do, haunted by a justified fear of restrictive side-effects imposed by a more ambitious dialect (eg. stuff you get in functional languages) on dynamically-typed code. I don't think the language should be modified in ways that only provide partial, speculative answers to certain problems when there's plenty of related activity going on elsewhere that's likely to provide more complete, proven answers to those problems. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
