Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | I think that the assignability to the names 'True' and 'False' is > > | incorrect, or at the very least subject to all sorts of odd results. > > It is necessary for 2.x to not break older code. I believe they > > will somehow be reserved, like None, in 3.0. > > > But of course None was assignable until (?) 2.3 and then became > formally constant, so it was no longer possible to assign to it or > even shadow it in a local namespace. So much for that kind of backward > compatibility!
None was present in the language for a long time before 2.3 though, and any code that actually assigned to it was asking for trouble. True and False didn't exist til recently and it was common for programs to define them. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
