On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:44:23 -0700, alex23 wrote: > If you believe providing a complementary __past__ namespace will work - > even though I believe Guido has explicitly stated it will never happen - > then the onus is on you to come up with an implementation.
Guido speaks only for CPython. Other implementations can always do differently. The Python 3 naysayers are welcome to fork Python 2.7 and support it forever, with or without a __past__ namespace. That's the power of open source software. And who knows, if it becomes popular enough, perhaps it will be ported to CPython too. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
