On Nov 8, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:

I was specifically after all kinds of deprecation warnings, which
generally are telling you that you need to make a change in order to
remain compatible in the future. That's sometimes interesting but
often irrelevant noise. So I would agree with Gregory P Smith's
proposal to just treat all deprecation warnings as silent.

+1

There are other kinds warnings which might be useful for other reasons
-- they typically point out code that does not do what you might think
it does. A good example is the warning added in 2.6 about "assert (x,
y)". This is something you ignore at your peril.

Yes, I was quite surprised at the few small example of this in Launchpad. This was actually something I was glad to see warned about, and of course we landed fixes for these independent of our Python 2.6 migration work.

I disagree. The -3 option is an example of a better approach: silent
by default, warnings enabled by a command line flag. If we can trust
developers to use -3 to check for Py3k incompatibilities, we should
also be able to trust them to check for deprecation warnings
explicitly.

+1

(Another argument to think about: if you download and install some 3rd
party code, deprecation warnings about that code are *only noise*
since they are not yours to fix. Warnings in a dynamic language work
very different than warnings in a compiled language.)

Very +1

-Barry

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
stdlib-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig

Reply via email to