On May 28, 11:46 pm, Dave Parker <davepar...@fla mingthunder.com >
See? 2.x -3.x. Major version. Not "next week's python", not "next year's
python", but "the next mayor version of python". With a clean, well documented,
upgrade path.
Unlike "next month's Flaming Thunder". (Unless you are producing a new major
version every week, in which case I shut up, and may think about buying several
versions only so you must keep maintaining all of them)
--
Luis Zarrabeitia
Facultad de Matemática y Computación, UH
wrote:
On May 28, 3:19 pm, "Diez B. Roggisch" <de...@nospam.w eb.dewrote:
"Like Perl 6, Python 3.0 will break backward compatibility. There is
no requirement that Python 2.x code will run unmodified on Python 3.0..
Kind of like how this year's program won't work on next year's
Python?
Python?
no requirement that Python 2.x code will run unmodified on Python 3.0..
python", but "the next mayor version of python". With a clean, well documented,
upgrade path.
Unlike "next month's Flaming Thunder". (Unless you are producing a new major
version every week, in which case I shut up, and may think about buying several
versions only so you must keep maintaining all of them)
--
Luis Zarrabeitia
Facultad de Matemática y Computación, UH
