Scott David Daniels wrote: > John Salerno wrote: >> Jonathan Gardner wrote: >>> You may want to read >>> http://python.org/doc/2.4.2/whatsnew/whatsnew24.html to get an idea of >>> what has changed from 2.3 to 2.4 if you buy the 2.3 book. >>> >> Yeah, I was looking at that, but it seems a little over my head right >> now. I just didn't want to learn anything and then have to "unlearn" it. >> I'm sure I will always be adding new things, so that isn't so much the >> problem I guess. > Python remains _extremely_ compatible from one minor version to the next > (2.2 to 2.3, 2.3 to 2.4, ...) Python 3000 (which may well be Python 3.0) > is allowed to break compatibility, _but_ it won't be conceptual > compatibility; it will just discard "old stuff we no longer like." I > would suggest you don't pay much attention to "old-style classes": > class WhatEver: > ... > and only use "new-style" classes: > class SomeClass(object): > ... > since the "old-style classes" are going away (the "class Name: ..." > syntax will start defining new-style classes as well). Starting with > 2.3 will put you quite near the modern edge, and the changes you will > have to learn are not that great. People are still running code written > under 1.5.2, so 2.3 is really quite modern. > > --Scott David Daniels > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the advice. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
